Tian Tian1, Xudong Gao1, Yunhe Ju1,2, Xiang Ding1,2, Yiqin Ai3,4. 1. Department of Radiation Therapy, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, 650118, Yunnan, China. 2. Department of Radiation Therapy, The Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, 650118, Yunnan, China. 3. Department of Radiation Therapy, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, 650118, Yunnan, China. tt1105661762@163.com. 4. Department of Radiation Therapy, The Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, 650118, Yunnan, China. tt1105661762@163.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the survival outcome of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) (chemotherapy or chemotherapy and intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) followed by radical surgery and of concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with locally advanced cervical adenocarcinoma and identify predictors of cervical adenocarcinoma. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our medical records of cervical adenocarcinoma patients treated with either NAT + surgery or CCRT in our institution from January 2013 to December 2017. The patients were treated with two-dimensional radiotherapy or three-dimensional-conformal or intensity-modulated radiotherapy combined with intracavitary brachytherapy. The regimen of concomitant chemotherapy was weekly cisplatin. The neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) was paclitaxel plus cisplatin. The primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We enrolled 121 patients. There were 42 (34.7%) patients in the NAT + surgery group and 79 (65.3%) in the CCRT group. After univariate multivariate analysis, NAT was an independent predictor of OS (p = 0.008) and PFS (p = 0.006). After propensity score matching, the 5-year OS rates in the NAT + surgery and CCRT groups were 25% and 4%, respectively (p = 0.00014), and the 5-year PFS rates were 25% and 4%, respectively (p = 0.00015). Subgroup analysis showed that the 5-year OS and PFS rates in the NACT + surgery and CCRT groups were both 20% and 8%, respectively (p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Compared with CCRT, NAT followed by radical surgery had better OS and PFS in locally advanced cervical adenocarcinoma. In subgroup analysis, OS and PFS were longer for NACT + surgery than for CCRT.
PURPOSE: To compare the survival outcome of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) (chemotherapy or chemotherapy and intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) followed by radical surgery and of concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with locally advanced cervical adenocarcinoma and identify predictors of cervical adenocarcinoma. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our medical records of cervical adenocarcinomapatients treated with either NAT + surgery or CCRT in our institution from January 2013 to December 2017. The patients were treated with two-dimensional radiotherapy or three-dimensional-conformal or intensity-modulated radiotherapy combined with intracavitary brachytherapy. The regimen of concomitant chemotherapy was weekly cisplatin. The neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) was paclitaxel plus cisplatin. The primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We enrolled 121 patients. There were 42 (34.7%) patients in the NAT + surgery group and 79 (65.3%) in the CCRT group. After univariate multivariate analysis, NAT was an independent predictor of OS (p = 0.008) and PFS (p = 0.006). After propensity score matching, the 5-year OS rates in the NAT + surgery and CCRT groups were 25% and 4%, respectively (p = 0.00014), and the 5-year PFS rates were 25% and 4%, respectively (p = 0.00015). Subgroup analysis showed that the 5-year OS and PFS rates in the NACT + surgery and CCRT groups were both 20% and 8%, respectively (p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Compared with CCRT, NAT followed by radical surgery had better OS and PFS in locally advanced cervical adenocarcinoma. In subgroup analysis, OS and PFS were longer for NACT + surgery than for CCRT.
Authors: Vijaya Galic; Thomas J Herzog; Sharyn N Lewin; Alfred I Neugut; William M Burke; Yu-Shiang Lu; Dawn L Hershman; Jason D Wright Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2012-01-18 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: N Katsumata; H Yoshikawa; H Kobayashi; T Saito; K Kuzuya; T Nakanishi; T Yasugi; N Yaegashi; H Yokota; S Kodama; T Mizunoe; M Hiura; T Kasamatsu; T Shibata; T Kamura Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-05-02 Impact factor: 7.640