Literature DB >> 27400321

The Prognosis and Risk Stratification Based on Pelvic Lymph Node Characteristics in Patients With Locally Advanced Cervical Squamous Cell Carcinoma Treated With Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy.

Xin Li1, Li-Chun Wei, Ying Zhang, Li-Na Zhao, Wei-Wei Li, Li-Jian Ping, Yun-Zhi Dang, Jing Hu, Mei Shi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to determine the prognostic significance of pelvic lymph node (PLN) characteristics and perform risk stratification in patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced cervical squamous cell carcinoma.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 609 patients with Federation Internationale de Gynecologie et d'Obstetrique (FIGO) stage II to IVa who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy, compared overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and pelvic recurrence-free survival between patients with or without PLN involvement. We further analyzed prognostic factors for OS and DMFS including FIGO stage, tumor volume, and lymph node (LN) characteristics in 300 patients with PLN involvement.
RESULTS: The 3-year OS rate was 81.7% versus 92.8% (P = 0.002) and the 3-year DMFS rate was 79.3% versus 92.7% (P = 0.006) in patients with or without PLN involvement, respectively. With univariable analysis, FIGO stage, LN-volume, LN-number, LN-diameter, and matted/necrotic LN affected both OS and DMFS. Based on multivariable analysis, we created a risk stratification model. For OS, the independent risk factors were FIGO stage III or IVa, LN-volume of 3 cm or more, LN-diameter of 1.5 cm or more, and matted/necrotic LN. The low-risk group (no risk factors), mid-risk group (1 or 2 risk factors), and high-risk group (3 or 4 risk factors) had a 3-year OS of 96.6%, 84.9%, and 64.7%, respectively (P = 0.005). For DMFS, LN-diameter of 1.5 cm or more, LN-number of 3 or more, and matted/necrotic LN were the independent risk factors. The subgroups for DMFS were the low-risk group (no risk factors), the mid-risk group (1 risk factor), and the high-risk group (2 or 3 risk factors), and the 3-year DMFS was 92.4%, 76.2%, and 64.6%, respectively (P = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The prognosis was significantly poorer for patients with high-risk lymph node characteristics. Using this risk stratification, we should select the most appropriate and individualized treatment modality to improve outcomes in those patients with a poorer prognosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27400321     DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000778

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer        ISSN: 1048-891X            Impact factor:   3.437


  9 in total

1.  Treatment Outcome and Prognosis Factors of FIGO 2018 Stage III Cervical Cancer Patients Treated with Definitive Concurrent Chemoradiation in Vietnam.

Authors:  Huyen Thi Phung; Minh Cong Truong; Long Thanh Nguyen; Anh Thi Van Dang; Thanh Ha Vu; Hoa Thi Nguyen
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2021-03-01

Review 2.  Prognostic models for locally advanced cervical cancer: external validation of the published models.

Authors:  David Lora; Agustín Gómez de la Cámara; Sara Pedraza Fernández; Rafael Enríquez de Salamanca; José Fermín Pérez Regadera Gómez
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 4.401

3.  Nomograms predicting survival and patterns of failure in patients with cervical cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy: A special focus on lymph nodes metastases.

Authors:  Weiping Wang; Xiaoliang Liu; Qingyu Meng; Fuquan Zhang; Ke Hu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-15       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Efficacy and Toxicity of IMRT-Based Simultaneous Integrated Boost for the Definitive Management of Positive Lymph Nodes in Patients with Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Yun-Zhi Dang; Pei Li; Jian-Ping Li; Ying Zhang; Li-Na Zhao; Wei-Wei Li; Li-Chun Wei; Mei Shi
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 4.207

5.  Predictors of Distant Metastasis in Patients with Cervical Cancer Treated with Definitive Radiotherapy.

Authors:  Xiaoliang Liu; Qingyu Meng; Weiping Wang; Ziqi Zhou; Fuquan Zhang; Ke Hu
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 4.207

6.  Predictive Value of Pin1 in Cervical Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions and Inhibition of Pin1 Exerts Potent Anticancer Activity against Human Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Yan-Tong Guo; Yan Lu; Yi-Yang Jia; Hui-Nan Qu; Da Qi; Xin-Qi Wang; Pei-Ye Song; Xiang-Shu Jin; Wen-Hong Xu; Yuan Dong; Ying-Ying Liang; Cheng-Shi Quan
Journal:  Aging Dis       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 6.745

7.  Validation of the 2018 FIGO Staging System of Cervical Cancer for Stage III Patients with a Cohort from China.

Authors:  Xiaoliang Liu; Junjie Wang; Ke Hu; Fuquan Zhang; Qingyu Meng; Weiping Wang; Dunhuang Wang; Ziqi Zhou; Kang Ren
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 3.989

8.  Who can benefit from a lymph node boost in definitive chemoradiotherapy for node-positive cervical cancer: an evaluation of nodal failure in patients without nodal boost.

Authors:  Haeyoung Kim; Won Park; Won Kyung Cho
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2020-05-22       Impact factor: 2.724

9.  A Risk Stratification for Patients with Cervical Cancer in Stage IIIC1 of the 2018 FIGO Staging System.

Authors:  Xiaoliang Liu; Weiping Wang; Ke Hu; Fuquan Zhang; Xiaorong Hou; Junfang Yan; Qingyu Meng; Ziqi Zhou; Zheng Miao; Hui Guan; Jiabin Ma; Jing Shen; Hongnan Zhen; Wenhui Wang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-01-15       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.