Literature DB >> 30247249

Rising Rates of Upfront Surgery in Early Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: What Factors Predict for This Treatment Paradigm?

Arya Amini, Tyler P Robin1, Priscilla K Stumpf1, Chad Rusthoven1, Tracey E Schefter1, Ashwin Shinde2, Yi-Jen Chen2, Scott M Glaser2, Bradley R Corr3, Christine M Fisher1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we analyzed patterns of care for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer to identify predictors for upfront surgery compared with definitive chemoradiation (CRT).
METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients aged 18 years or older with Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics IB2-IIB cervical cancer. All patients underwent either upfront hysterectomy with or without postoperative radiation therapy versus definitive CRT. Logistic regression was used to assess variables associated with modality of treatment (surgery vs CRT).
RESULTS: Of the 9494 patients included, 2151 (22.7%) underwent upfront surgery. Of those undergoing surgery, 380 (17.7%) had positive margins, 478 (22.2%) had positive nodes, and 458 (21.3%) had pathologic involvement of the parametrium. Under multiple logistic regression, rates of surgery significantly increased from 2004 (12.2%) to 2012 (31.2%) (odds ratio [OR] per year increase, 1.15; confidence interval [CI], 1.12-1.17; P < 0.001). Upfront surgery was more commonly performed in urban (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.41; P = 0.018) and rural counties (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.24-2.58; P = 0.002), for adenocarcinoma (OR, 2.14; 1.88-2.44; P < 0.001) and adenosquamous (OR, 2.69; 2.11-3.43; P < 0.001) histologies, and in patients from higher median income communities (ORs, 1.19-1.37). Upfront surgery was less common at academic centers (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58-0.93; P = 0.011).
CONCLUSIONS: Rates of upfront surgery relative to definitive CRT have increased significantly over the past decade. In the setting of level 1 evidence supporting the use of definitive CRT alone for these women, the rising rates of upfront surgery raises concern for both unnecessary surgical procedures with higher rates of treatment-related morbidity and greater health care costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30247249     DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001323

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


  4 in total

1.  Construction of Gene Modules and Analysis of Prognostic Biomarkers for Cervical Cancer by Weighted Gene Co-Expression Network Analysis.

Authors:  Jiamei Liu; Shengye Liu; Xianghong Yang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 6.244

2.  Comparison of treatment outcomes of surgery and radiotherapy, including concurrent chemoradiotherapy for stage Ib2-IIb cervical adenocarcinoma patients: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Eiji Kondo; Kenta Yoshida; Tsutomu Tabata; Yoichi Kobayashi; Wataru Yamagami; Yasuhiko Ebina; Masanori Kaneuchi; Satoru Nagase; Hiroko Machida; Mikio Mikami
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 4.401

3.  Manifestation of Urinary Tract Injury during Cervical Cancer Surgery Based on CT Urography Secretion Phase Images.

Authors:  Song Lin; Xiaoshan Li; Yan Zhang; Xiaowen Mao; Xingchi Liang; Shigang Cheng; Lingli Zhang
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 3.009

Review 4.  Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy in the precision surgery for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Noriaki Sakuragi; Gen Murakami; Yosuke Konno; Masanori Kaneuchi; Hidemichi Watari
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 4.401

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.