A Gaudet Chardonnet1, H Azaïs1, M Ballester2, E Raimond3, S Bendifallah4,5,6, L Ouldamer7, C Coutant8, O Graesslin3, C Touboul9, P Collinet9,10, A Bricou11, C Huchon12, E Daraï4,5,6, V Lavoue13, M Koskas14, C Uzan1,5,6, G Canlorbe15,16,17. 1. AP-HP (Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris), Department of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Paris, France. 2. Service de Chirurgie Gynécologique et Mammaire, Groupe Hospitalier Diaconesses Croix Saint Simon, Paris, France. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institute Alix de Champagne University Hospital, Reims, France. 4. AP-HP (Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris), Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Tenon University Hospital, Paris, France. 5. INSERM UMR_S_938, "Cancer Biology and Therapeutics," Centre de Recherche Saint-Antoine (CRSA), Sorbonne University, Paris, France. 6. Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), Sorbonne University, Paris, France. 7. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Tours, Tours, France. 8. Center de Lutte Contre le Cancer Georges François Leclerc, Dijon, France. 9. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal, Créteil, France. 10. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille, France. 11. AP-HP (Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris), Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Jean Verdier University Hospital, Bondy, France. 12. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal, Poissy, France. 13. Service de Gynécologie, INSERM 1242, Oncogenesis, Stress and Signaling, CRLC Eugène Marquis, Université de Rennes 1, Hopital Sud, CHU de Rennes, Rennes, France. 14. Service de Chirurgie et Oncologie Gynécologique et Mammaire, APHP, Université Paris Diderot Hôpital Bichat, Paris, France. 15. AP-HP (Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris), Department of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Paris, France. geoffroy.canlorbe@aphp.fr. 16. INSERM UMR_S_938, "Cancer Biology and Therapeutics," Centre de Recherche Saint-Antoine (CRSA), Sorbonne University, Paris, France. geoffroy.canlorbe@aphp.fr. 17. Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), Sorbonne University, Paris, France. geoffroy.canlorbe@aphp.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prognosis for patients with endometrial cancer (EC) peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) recurrence has received little study. This study aimed to determine specific risk factors and prognosis of EC with PC recurrence (PCR) versus no PC recurrence (NPCR). METHODS: Data of all patients with EC who received primary surgical treatment between January 2000 and February 2017 were abstracted from the French FRANCOGYN Research Group database. Clinical and pathologic variables were compared between the two groups (PCR vs. NPCR). Multivariate analysis was performed to define prognostic factors for peritoneal recurrence. Overall survivals (OS) of patients after recurrence were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: The study analyzed 1466 patients, and 257 of these patients (17.5%) had recurrence. At presentation, 63 of these patients had PC. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages 3 and 4 disease were significantly associated with PCR versus NPCR (odds ratio 2.24; 95% confidence interval 1.23-4.07; p = 0.008). The death rate for the patients with PC was 47.6%, with a median survival of 12 months after diagnosis of recurrence. According to the histologic subtype, OS was 29 months (Q1-Q3, 13-NA) for endometrioid carcinomas, 7.5 months (Q1-Q3, 4-15) for serous carcinomas, and 10 months (Q1-Q3, 5-15) for clear cell carcinomas. Chemotherapy for treatment of PCR was associated with improved OS after recurrence (OSAR; p = 0.0025). CONCLUSION: An initial advanced stage of EC is a risk factor for PCR. For women with PCR, a diagnosis of type 1 EC recurrence more than 12 months after the initial treatment and management of PCR with chemotherapy is associated with improved OSAR. Prospective studies are needed to determine the precise optimal management required in this clinical situation and to assess the relevance of biomarkers to predict the risk of PCR for EC patients.
BACKGROUND: The prognosis for patients with endometrial cancer (EC) peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) recurrence has received little study. This study aimed to determine specific risk factors and prognosis of EC with PC recurrence (PCR) versus no PC recurrence (NPCR). METHODS: Data of all patients with EC who received primary surgical treatment between January 2000 and February 2017 were abstracted from the French FRANCOGYN Research Group database. Clinical and pathologic variables were compared between the two groups (PCR vs. NPCR). Multivariate analysis was performed to define prognostic factors for peritoneal recurrence. Overall survivals (OS) of patients after recurrence were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: The study analyzed 1466 patients, and 257 of these patients (17.5%) had recurrence. At presentation, 63 of these patients had PC. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages 3 and 4 disease were significantly associated with PCR versus NPCR (odds ratio 2.24; 95% confidence interval 1.23-4.07; p = 0.008). The death rate for the patients with PC was 47.6%, with a median survival of 12 months after diagnosis of recurrence. According to the histologic subtype, OS was 29 months (Q1-Q3, 13-NA) for endometrioid carcinomas, 7.5 months (Q1-Q3, 4-15) for serous carcinomas, and 10 months (Q1-Q3, 5-15) for clear cell carcinomas. Chemotherapy for treatment of PCR was associated with improved OS after recurrence (OSAR; p = 0.0025). CONCLUSION: An initial advanced stage of EC is a risk factor for PCR. For women with PCR, a diagnosis of type 1 EC recurrence more than 12 months after the initial treatment and management of PCR with chemotherapy is associated with improved OSAR. Prospective studies are needed to determine the precise optimal management required in this clinical situation and to assess the relevance of biomarkers to predict the risk of PCR for EC patients.
Authors: Manuel Gomes David; Naoual Bakrin; Julia Salleron; Marie Christine Kaminsky; Jean Marc Bereder; Jean Jacques Tuech; Kuno Lehmann; Sanket Mehta; Olivier Glehen; Frédéric Marchal Journal: BMC Surg Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 2.102