Literature DB >> 36099140

Validity of the 2014 FIGO Stage IIIA1 Subclassification for Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Peritoneal Cancers.

Ayumu Matsuoka1, Shinichi Tate2, Kyoko Nishikimi2, Masami Iwamoto3, Satoyo Otsuka2, Makio Shozu2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIM: The 2014 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification subdivides patients with stage IIIA1 ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancers by the greatest dimension of metastatic lymph node without supporting evidence. This study aimed to assess the validity of this subdivision. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective single-institution cohort study was performed in patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer from 2009 to 2020. We compared outcomes between patients diagnosed with IIIA1(i) (metastasis ≤10 mm in the greatest dimension) and IIIA1(ii) (metastasis >10 mm in the greatest dimension).
RESULTS: Of the 895 patients, 46 (5.1%) were classified as stage IIIA1, 20 as IIIA1(i), and 26 as IIIA1(ii). In stage IIIA1(ii), there were significantly more cases of serous carcinoma (p<0.001), and the number of positive nodes and lymph node ratio were significantly higher than those in stage IIIA1(i) (p=0.001, p=0.002). Five-year progression-free survival was 68.7% in patients with stage IIIA1(i) cancer and 58.1% in those with stage IIIA1(ii) (p=0.58). Five-year overall survival was 83.1% in patients with stage IIIA1(i) cancer and 80.2% in those with stage IIIA1(ii) (p=0.44). Among other patient characteristics and pathologic findings, there were no prognostic factors for patients with stage IIIA1 cancer.
CONCLUSION: In this retrospective cohort study, further classification of FIGO stage IIIA1 cancer was not significantly associated with patient outcomes.
Copyright © 2022, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FIGO; Ovarian cancer; fallopian tube cancer; lymph node metastasis; peritoneal cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36099140      PMCID: PMC9463913          DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12980

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  In Vivo        ISSN: 0258-851X            Impact factor:   2.406


  30 in total

1.  New FIGO staging system of vulvar cancer indeed provides a better reflection of prognosis.

Authors:  S van der Steen; H P van de Nieuwenhof; L Massuger; J Bulten; J A de Hullu
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva.

Authors:  Neville F Hacker
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2009-03-28       Impact factor: 3.561

3.  International Federation of gynecology and obstetrics staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: estimation of survival in patients with node-positive epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Augusto Pereira; Tirso Pérez-Medina; Javier F Magrina; Paul M Magtibay; Ana Rodríguez-Tapia; Irene Peregrin; Elsa Mendizabal; Luís Ortiz-Quintana
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.437

4.  Ovarian serous tumors of low malignant potential with nodal low-grade serous carcinoma.

Authors:  Bojana Djordjevic; Anais Malpica
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 6.394

5.  Systematic aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy versus resection of bulky nodes only in optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Pierluigi Benedetti Panici; Angelo Maggioni; Neville Hacker; Fabio Landoni; Sven Ackermann; Elio Campagnutta; Karl Tamussino; Raimund Winter; Antonio Pellegrino; Stefano Greggi; Roberto Angioli; Natalina Manci; Giovanni Scambia; Tiziana Dell'Anna; Roldano Fossati; Irene Floriani; Rita S Rossi; Roberto Grassi; Giuseppe Favalli; Francesco Raspagliesi; Diana Giannarelli; Luca Martella; Costantino Mangioni
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-04-20       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva: 2021 revision.

Authors:  Alexander B Olawaiye; Joseph Cotler; Mauricio A Cuello; Neerja Bhatla; Aikou Okamoto; Sarikapan Wilailak; Chittaranjan N Purandare; Gerhard Lindeque; Jonathan S Berek; Sean Kehoe
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2021-10       Impact factor: 4.447

7.  Lymph node involvement in epithelial ovarian cancer: analysis of 276 pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomies and surgical implications.

Authors:  Philippe Morice; Franklin Joulie; Sophie Camatte; David Atallah; Roman Rouzier; Patricia Pautier; Christophe Pomel; Catherine Lhommé; Pierre Duvillard; Damienne Castaigne
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 6.113

8.  FIGO stage IIIC endometrial carcinoma: prognostic factors and outcomes.

Authors:  Anna V Hoekstra; Robert J Kim; William Small; Alfred W Rademaker; Irene B Helenowski; Diljeet K Singh; Julian C Schink; John R Lurain
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2009-05-09       Impact factor: 5.482

9.  Prognostic factors and a value of 2009 FIGO staging system in vulvar cancer.

Authors:  Jacek J Sznurkowski; Tomasz Milczek; Janusz Emerich
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2012-12-22       Impact factor: 2.344

10.  Impact of lymph node ratio on survival in stage IIIC endometrioid endometrial cancer: a Turkish Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

Authors:  Ali Ayhan; Nazlı Topfedaisi Ozkan; Murat Öz; Günsu Kimyon Comert; Zeliha Firat Cuylan; Gonca Çoban; Osman Turkmen; Baki Erdem; Hanifi Şahin; Özgür Akbayır; Murat Dede; Ahmet Taner Turan; Husnu Celik; Tayfun Güngör; Ali Haberal; Macit Arvas; Mehmet Mutlu Meydanli
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 4.401

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.