Brian Bingham1, Andrew Orton2, Dustin Boothe2, Greg Stoddard3, Y Jessica Huang2, David K Gaffney2, Matthew M Poppe4. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 3. Division of Epidemiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. Electronic address: Matthew.poppe@hci.utah.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the survival benefit of adding vaginal brachytherapy (BT) to pelvic external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in women with stage III endometrial cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The National Cancer Data Base was used to identify patients with stage III endometrial cancer from 2004 to 2013. Only women who received adjuvant EBRT were analyzed. Women were grouped according to receipt of BT. Logistic regression modeling was used to identify predictors of receiving BT. Log-rank statistics were used to compare survival outcomes. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to evaluate the effect of BT on survival. A propensity score-matched analysis was also conducted among women with cervical involvement. RESULTS: We evaluated 12,988 patients with stage III endometrial carcinoma, 39% of whom received EBRT plus BT. Women who received BT were more likely to have endocervical or cervical stromal involvement (odds ratios 2.03 and 1.77; P<.01, respectively). For patients receiving EBRT alone, the 5-year survival was 66% versus 69% with the addition of BT at 5 years (P<.01). Brachytherapy remained significantly predictive of decreased risk of death (hazard ratio 0.86; P<.01) on multivariate Cox regression. The addition of BT to EBRT did not affect survival among women without cervical involvement (P=.84). For women with endocervical or cervical stromal invasion, the addition of BT significantly improved survival (log-rank P<.01). Receipt of EBRT plus BT was associated with improved survival in women with positive and negative surgical margins, and receiving chemotherapy did not alter the benefit of BT. Propensity score-matched analysis results confirmed the benefit of BT among women with cervical involvement (hazard ratio 0.80; P=.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this population of women with stage III endometrial cancer the addition of BT to EBRT was associated with an improvement in survival for women with endocervical or cervical stromal invasion.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the survival benefit of adding vaginal brachytherapy (BT) to pelvic external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in women with stage III endometrial cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The National Cancer Data Base was used to identify patients with stage III endometrial cancer from 2004 to 2013. Only women who received adjuvant EBRT were analyzed. Women were grouped according to receipt of BT. Logistic regression modeling was used to identify predictors of receiving BT. Log-rank statistics were used to compare survival outcomes. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to evaluate the effect of BT on survival. A propensity score-matched analysis was also conducted among women with cervical involvement. RESULTS: We evaluated 12,988 patients with stage III endometrial carcinoma, 39% of whom received EBRT plus BT. Women who received BT were more likely to have endocervical or cervical stromal involvement (odds ratios 2.03 and 1.77; P<.01, respectively). For patients receiving EBRT alone, the 5-year survival was 66% versus 69% with the addition of BT at 5 years (P<.01). Brachytherapy remained significantly predictive of decreased risk of death (hazard ratio 0.86; P<.01) on multivariate Cox regression. The addition of BT to EBRT did not affect survival among women without cervical involvement (P=.84). For women with endocervical or cervical stromal invasion, the addition of BT significantly improved survival (log-rank P<.01). Receipt of EBRT plus BT was associated with improved survival in women with positive and negative surgical margins, and receiving chemotherapy did not alter the benefit of BT. Propensity score-matched analysis results confirmed the benefit of BT among women with cervical involvement (hazard ratio 0.80; P=.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this population of women with stage III endometrial cancer the addition of BT to EBRT was associated with an improvement in survival for women with endocervical or cervical stromal invasion.
Authors: Ursula A Matulonis; Helen Q Huang; Virginia L Filiaci; Marcus Randall; Paul A DiSilvestro; Katherine M Moxley; Jeffrey M Fowler; Matthew A Powell; Nick M Spirtos; Krishnansu S Tewari; William E Richards; John M Nakayama; David G Mutch; David S Miller; Daniela Matei; Lari B Wenzel Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2021-12-11 Impact factor: 5.304
Authors: Stephanie M de Boer; Melanie E Powell; Linda Mileshkin; Dionyssios Katsaros; Paul Bessette; Christine Haie-Meder; Petronella B Ottevanger; Jonathan A Ledermann; Pearly Khaw; Alessandro Colombo; Anthony Fyles; Marie-Helene Baron; Ina M Jürgenliemk-Schulz; Henry C Kitchener; Hans W Nijman; Godfrey Wilson; Susan Brooks; Silvestro Carinelli; Diane Provencher; Chantal Hanzen; Ludy C H W Lutgens; Vincent T H B M Smit; Naveena Singh; Viet Do; Romerai D'Amico; Remi A Nout; Amanda Feeney; Karen W Verhoeven-Adema; Hein Putter; Carien L Creutzberg Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2018-02-12 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Markus Glatzer; Kari Tanderup; Angeles Rovirosa; Lars Fokdal; Claudia Ordeanu; Luca Tagliaferri; Cyrus Chargari; Vratislav Strnad; Johannes Athanasios Dimopoulos; Barbara Šegedin; Rachel Cooper; Esten Søndrol Nakken; Primoz Petric; Elzbieta van der Steen-Banasik; Kristina Lössl; Ina M Jürgenliemk-Schulz; Peter Niehoff; Ruth S Hermansson; Remi A Nout; Paul Martin Putora; Ludwig Plasswilm; Nikolaos Tselis Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-11 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Chiachien Jake Wang; Alana Christie; Michael R Folkert; Xian Jin Xie; Kevin Albuquerque Journal: J Gynecol Oncol Date: 2018-03-06 Impact factor: 4.401