Weili Zhou1, Yangyang Yue2, Dongmei Pei3,4. 1. Department of General Surgery, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 2. Department of Health Management, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 3. Department of Health Management, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, China. peidm1111@hotmail.com. 4. Department of Family Medicine, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, China. peidm1111@hotmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The effectiveness of vaginectomy compared to that of local tumor excision (LTE) for the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I and II vaginal carcinoma is unclear. We aimed to clarify if the effectiveness of vaginectomy is comparable to that of LTE in the real world. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated data of patients with primary vaginal carcinoma registered in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database from 2004 to 2016. The multivariate Cox proportional hazards models and Fine-Gray competing risk models were used to estimate the overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) after propensity score matching. RESULTS: Of the 533 patients with FIGO stage I and II primary vaginal carcinoma, 243 and 290 patients were treated with vaginectomy and LTE, respectively. Vaginectomy was significantly associated with improved OS [unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-0.95, P = 0.020; adjusted HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.87, P = 0.005] and DSS [unadjusted subdistribution HR (sHR) = 0.75, 95% CI 0.52-1.07, P = 0.115; adjusted sHR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.44-0.97, P = 0.036]. Age, marital status, histology type, FIGO stage, chemotherapy, and lymph node metastases were significant prognostic factors of survival. Moreover, radiotherapy did not influence the effectiveness of vaginectomy. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis confirmed the consistent beneficial effectiveness of vaginectomy. CONCLUSION: Compared with LTE, vaginectomy results in significantly prolonged survival in patients with FIGO stage I and II primary vaginal carcinoma. Thus, it can be the preferred treatment for FIGO I and II vaginal cancer regardless of radiotherapy status.
PURPOSE: The effectiveness of vaginectomy compared to that of local tumor excision (LTE) for the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I and II vaginal carcinoma is unclear. We aimed to clarify if the effectiveness of vaginectomy is comparable to that of LTE in the real world. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated data of patients with primary vaginal carcinoma registered in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database from 2004 to 2016. The multivariate Cox proportional hazards models and Fine-Gray competing risk models were used to estimate the overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) after propensity score matching. RESULTS: Of the 533 patients with FIGO stage I and II primary vaginal carcinoma, 243 and 290 patients were treated with vaginectomy and LTE, respectively. Vaginectomy was significantly associated with improved OS [unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-0.95, P = 0.020; adjusted HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.87, P = 0.005] and DSS [unadjusted subdistribution HR (sHR) = 0.75, 95% CI 0.52-1.07, P = 0.115; adjusted sHR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.44-0.97, P = 0.036]. Age, marital status, histology type, FIGO stage, chemotherapy, and lymph node metastases were significant prognostic factors of survival. Moreover, radiotherapy did not influence the effectiveness of vaginectomy. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis confirmed the consistent beneficial effectiveness of vaginectomy. CONCLUSION: Compared with LTE, vaginectomy results in significantly prolonged survival in patients with FIGO stage I and II primary vaginal carcinoma. Thus, it can be the preferred treatment for FIGO I and II vaginal cancer regardless of radiotherapy status.