OBJECTIVES: Uterine carcinosarcomas are an aggressive and rare form of endometrial cancer. Omentectomy is not part of routine staging, but biopsy is often done because omental disease is a known poor prognostic indicator. We sought to define the role of routine omental sampling during surgical staging. METHODS/MATERIALS: Patients who underwent staging for uterine carcinosarcoma at our institution from January 2000 to December 2013 were identified. Clinical and pathological data were abstracted. Univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors of progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of omental disease. RESULTS: We identified 153 patients. The median age was 65 years (range, 40-87 years), and 88.9% were Caucasian. Omental sampling was performed in 106 (69.3%) patients. Of these, 17(16%) had pathologically confirmed omental disease, and 6 (35.3%) with microscopic disease. On multivariable analysis, tumor size (P = 0.024) and postoperative radiation (P = 0.041) were significant predictors of progression-free survival, and omental disease (P = 0.002), residual disease (P = 0.03), and tumor size (P = 0.025) were significant predictors of OS. Median OS was 11.4 versus 128.7 months for those who did and did not have omental disease, respectively (P <0.001). The median OS for those who had omental sampling (127.7 months) versus those who did not (71.3 months) was not significantly different (P = 0.7432). CONCLUSIONS: Although survival was not significantly different between those who did and did not have omental sampling, omental disease had a significant impact on survival. Of those with omental disease, 35% had microscopic disease that could be missed if routine biopsy is not performed, suggesting a role for routine omental sampling.
OBJECTIVES: Uterine carcinosarcomas are an aggressive and rare form of endometrial cancer. Omentectomy is not part of routine staging, but biopsy is often done because omental disease is a known poor prognostic indicator. We sought to define the role of routine omental sampling during surgical staging. METHODS/MATERIALS: Patients who underwent staging for uterine carcinosarcoma at our institution from January 2000 to December 2013 were identified. Clinical and pathological data were abstracted. Univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors of progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of omental disease. RESULTS: We identified 153 patients. The median age was 65 years (range, 40-87 years), and 88.9% were Caucasian. Omental sampling was performed in 106 (69.3%) patients. Of these, 17(16%) had pathologically confirmed omental disease, and 6 (35.3%) with microscopic disease. On multivariable analysis, tumor size (P = 0.024) and postoperative radiation (P = 0.041) were significant predictors of progression-free survival, and omental disease (P = 0.002), residual disease (P = 0.03), and tumor size (P = 0.025) were significant predictors of OS. Median OS was 11.4 versus 128.7 months for those who did and did not have omental disease, respectively (P <0.001). The median OS for those who had omental sampling (127.7 months) versus those who did not (71.3 months) was not significantly different (P = 0.7432). CONCLUSIONS: Although survival was not significantly different between those who did and did not have omental sampling, omental disease had a significant impact on survival. Of those with omental disease, 35% had microscopic disease that could be missed if routine biopsy is not performed, suggesting a role for routine omental sampling.
Authors: Nicole Concin; Carien L Creutzberg; Ignace Vergote; David Cibula; Mansoor Raza Mirza; Simone Marnitz; Jonathan A Ledermann; Tjalling Bosse; Cyrus Chargari; Anna Fagotti; Christina Fotopoulou; Antonio González-Martín; Sigurd F Lax; Domenica Lorusso; Christian Marth; Philippe Morice; Remi A Nout; Dearbhaile E O'Donnell; Denis Querleu; Maria Rosaria Raspollini; Jalid Sehouli; Alina E Sturdza; Alexandra Taylor; Anneke M Westermann; Pauline Wimberger; Nicoletta Colombo; François Planchamp; Xavier Matias-Guiu Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Giacomo Corrado; Francesca Ciccarone; Francesco Cosentino; Francesco Legge; Andrea Rosati; Martina Arcieri; Luigi Carlo Turco; Camilla Certelli; Alex Federico; Enrico Vizza; Francesco Fanfani; Giovanni Scambia; Gabriella Ferrandina Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 4.553