Cargando…

FIGO Staging for Uterine Sarcomas: Can the Revised 2008 Staging System Predict Survival Outcome Better?

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare survival of patients with uterine sarcomas using the 1988 and 2008 International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging systems to determine if revised 2008 staging accurately predicts patient survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A tota...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yim, Ga Won, Nam, Eun Ji, Kim, Sang Wun, Kim, Young Tae
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Yonsei University College of Medicine 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3990069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24719120
http://dx.doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2014.55.3.563
_version_ 1782312220856680448
author Yim, Ga Won
Nam, Eun Ji
Kim, Sang Wun
Kim, Young Tae
author_facet Yim, Ga Won
Nam, Eun Ji
Kim, Sang Wun
Kim, Young Tae
author_sort Yim, Ga Won
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare survival of patients with uterine sarcomas using the 1988 and 2008 International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging systems to determine if revised 2008 staging accurately predicts patient survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 83 patients with leiomyosarcoma and endometrial stromal sarcoma treated at Yonsei University Health System between March of 1989 and November of 2009 were reviewed. The prognostic validity of both FIGO staging systems, as well as other factors was analyzed. RESULTS: Leiomyosarcoma and endometrial stromal sarcoma comprised 47.0% and 53.0% of this study population, respectively. Using the new staging system, 43 (67.2%) of 64 eligible patients were reclassified. Among those 64 patients, 45 (70.3%) patients with limited uterine corpus involvement were divided into stage IA (n=14) and IB (n=31). Univariate analysis demonstrated a significant difference between stages I and II and the other stages in both staging systems (p<0.001) with respect to progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). Age, menopausal status, tumor size, and cell type were significantly associated with OS (p=0.011, p=0.031, p=0.044, p=0.009, respectively). In multivariate analysis, revised FIGO stage greater than III was an independent poor prognostic factor with a hazard ratio of 9.06 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.49-33.0, p=0.001]. CONCLUSION: The 2008 FIGO staging system is more valid than the previous FIGO staging system for uterine sarcomas with respect to its ability to distinguish early-stage patients from advanced-stage patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3990069
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Yonsei University College of Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39900692014-05-01 FIGO Staging for Uterine Sarcomas: Can the Revised 2008 Staging System Predict Survival Outcome Better? Yim, Ga Won Nam, Eun Ji Kim, Sang Wun Kim, Young Tae Yonsei Med J Original Article PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare survival of patients with uterine sarcomas using the 1988 and 2008 International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging systems to determine if revised 2008 staging accurately predicts patient survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 83 patients with leiomyosarcoma and endometrial stromal sarcoma treated at Yonsei University Health System between March of 1989 and November of 2009 were reviewed. The prognostic validity of both FIGO staging systems, as well as other factors was analyzed. RESULTS: Leiomyosarcoma and endometrial stromal sarcoma comprised 47.0% and 53.0% of this study population, respectively. Using the new staging system, 43 (67.2%) of 64 eligible patients were reclassified. Among those 64 patients, 45 (70.3%) patients with limited uterine corpus involvement were divided into stage IA (n=14) and IB (n=31). Univariate analysis demonstrated a significant difference between stages I and II and the other stages in both staging systems (p<0.001) with respect to progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). Age, menopausal status, tumor size, and cell type were significantly associated with OS (p=0.011, p=0.031, p=0.044, p=0.009, respectively). In multivariate analysis, revised FIGO stage greater than III was an independent poor prognostic factor with a hazard ratio of 9.06 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.49-33.0, p=0.001]. CONCLUSION: The 2008 FIGO staging system is more valid than the previous FIGO staging system for uterine sarcomas with respect to its ability to distinguish early-stage patients from advanced-stage patients. Yonsei University College of Medicine 2014-05-01 2014-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC3990069/ /pubmed/24719120 http://dx.doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2014.55.3.563 Text en © Copyright: Yonsei University College of Medicine 2014 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Yim, Ga Won
Nam, Eun Ji
Kim, Sang Wun
Kim, Young Tae
FIGO Staging for Uterine Sarcomas: Can the Revised 2008 Staging System Predict Survival Outcome Better?
title FIGO Staging for Uterine Sarcomas: Can the Revised 2008 Staging System Predict Survival Outcome Better?
title_full FIGO Staging for Uterine Sarcomas: Can the Revised 2008 Staging System Predict Survival Outcome Better?
title_fullStr FIGO Staging for Uterine Sarcomas: Can the Revised 2008 Staging System Predict Survival Outcome Better?
title_full_unstemmed FIGO Staging for Uterine Sarcomas: Can the Revised 2008 Staging System Predict Survival Outcome Better?
title_short FIGO Staging for Uterine Sarcomas: Can the Revised 2008 Staging System Predict Survival Outcome Better?
title_sort figo staging for uterine sarcomas: can the revised 2008 staging system predict survival outcome better?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3990069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24719120
http://dx.doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2014.55.3.563
work_keys_str_mv AT yimgawon figostagingforuterinesarcomascantherevised2008stagingsystempredictsurvivaloutcomebetter
AT nameunji figostagingforuterinesarcomascantherevised2008stagingsystempredictsurvivaloutcomebetter
AT kimsangwun figostagingforuterinesarcomascantherevised2008stagingsystempredictsurvivaloutcomebetter
AT kimyoungtae figostagingforuterinesarcomascantherevised2008stagingsystempredictsurvivaloutcomebetter