Cargando…

Effect of the surgical approach on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A real‐world multicenter study of a large Chinese cohort from 2006 to 2017

OBJECTIVE: To compare survival outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and laparotomy in early‐stage cervical cancer (CC) patients. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO, 2009) stage IA1 (lymphovascular i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guo, Chenyan, Tang, Xiaoyan, Meng, Yan, Zhang, Ying, Zhang, Xuyin, Guo, Jingjing, Lei, Xiaohong, Qiu, Junjun, Hua, Keqin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7433827/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32628356
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3287
_version_ 1783572029311549440
author Guo, Chenyan
Tang, Xiaoyan
Meng, Yan
Zhang, Ying
Zhang, Xuyin
Guo, Jingjing
Lei, Xiaohong
Qiu, Junjun
Hua, Keqin
author_facet Guo, Chenyan
Tang, Xiaoyan
Meng, Yan
Zhang, Ying
Zhang, Xuyin
Guo, Jingjing
Lei, Xiaohong
Qiu, Junjun
Hua, Keqin
author_sort Guo, Chenyan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare survival outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and laparotomy in early‐stage cervical cancer (CC) patients. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO, 2009) stage IA1 (lymphovascular invasion)‐IIA1 CC patients undergoing MIS or laparotomy at four tertiary hospitals from 2006 to 2017. Propensity score matching and weighting and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed. Survival was compared in various matched cohorts and subgroups. RESULTS: Three thousand two hundred and fifty‐two patients (2439 MIS and 813 laparotomy) were included after matching. (1) The 2‐ and 5‐year recurrence‐free survival (RFS) (2‐year, hazard ratio [HR], 1.81;95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09‐3.0; 5‐year, HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.21‐3.89) or overall survival (OS) (2‐year, HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.03‐3.40; 5‐year, HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.29‐5.10) were significantly worse for MIS in patients with stage I B1, but not the cohort overall (2‐year RFS, HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.76‐1.42; 2‐year OS, HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.70‐1.41; 5‐year RFS, HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.76‐1.65; 5‐year OS, HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.79‐1.83) or other stages (2) In a subgroup analysis, MIS exhibited poorer survival in many population subsets, even in patients with less risk factors, such as patients with squamous cell carcinoma, negative for parametrial involvement, with negative surgical margins, negative for lymph node metastasis, and deep stromal invasion < 2/3. (3) In the cohort treated with (2172, 54%) or without adjuvant treatment (1814, 46%), MIS showed worse RFS than laparotomy in patients treated without adjuvant treatment, whereas no differences in RFS and OS were observed in adjuvant‐treatment cohort. (4) Inadequate surgeon proficiency strongly correlated with poor RFS and OS in patients receiving MIS compared with laparotomy. CONCLUSIONS: MIS exhibited poorer survival outcomes than laparotomy group in many population subsets, even in low‐risk subgroups. Therefore, laparotomy should be the recommended approach for CC patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7433827
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74338272020-08-20 Effect of the surgical approach on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A real‐world multicenter study of a large Chinese cohort from 2006 to 2017 Guo, Chenyan Tang, Xiaoyan Meng, Yan Zhang, Ying Zhang, Xuyin Guo, Jingjing Lei, Xiaohong Qiu, Junjun Hua, Keqin Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research OBJECTIVE: To compare survival outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and laparotomy in early‐stage cervical cancer (CC) patients. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO, 2009) stage IA1 (lymphovascular invasion)‐IIA1 CC patients undergoing MIS or laparotomy at four tertiary hospitals from 2006 to 2017. Propensity score matching and weighting and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed. Survival was compared in various matched cohorts and subgroups. RESULTS: Three thousand two hundred and fifty‐two patients (2439 MIS and 813 laparotomy) were included after matching. (1) The 2‐ and 5‐year recurrence‐free survival (RFS) (2‐year, hazard ratio [HR], 1.81;95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09‐3.0; 5‐year, HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.21‐3.89) or overall survival (OS) (2‐year, HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.03‐3.40; 5‐year, HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.29‐5.10) were significantly worse for MIS in patients with stage I B1, but not the cohort overall (2‐year RFS, HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.76‐1.42; 2‐year OS, HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.70‐1.41; 5‐year RFS, HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.76‐1.65; 5‐year OS, HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.79‐1.83) or other stages (2) In a subgroup analysis, MIS exhibited poorer survival in many population subsets, even in patients with less risk factors, such as patients with squamous cell carcinoma, negative for parametrial involvement, with negative surgical margins, negative for lymph node metastasis, and deep stromal invasion < 2/3. (3) In the cohort treated with (2172, 54%) or without adjuvant treatment (1814, 46%), MIS showed worse RFS than laparotomy in patients treated without adjuvant treatment, whereas no differences in RFS and OS were observed in adjuvant‐treatment cohort. (4) Inadequate surgeon proficiency strongly correlated with poor RFS and OS in patients receiving MIS compared with laparotomy. CONCLUSIONS: MIS exhibited poorer survival outcomes than laparotomy group in many population subsets, even in low‐risk subgroups. Therefore, laparotomy should be the recommended approach for CC patients. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7433827/ /pubmed/32628356 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3287 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Cancer Research
Guo, Chenyan
Tang, Xiaoyan
Meng, Yan
Zhang, Ying
Zhang, Xuyin
Guo, Jingjing
Lei, Xiaohong
Qiu, Junjun
Hua, Keqin
Effect of the surgical approach on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A real‐world multicenter study of a large Chinese cohort from 2006 to 2017
title Effect of the surgical approach on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A real‐world multicenter study of a large Chinese cohort from 2006 to 2017
title_full Effect of the surgical approach on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A real‐world multicenter study of a large Chinese cohort from 2006 to 2017
title_fullStr Effect of the surgical approach on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A real‐world multicenter study of a large Chinese cohort from 2006 to 2017
title_full_unstemmed Effect of the surgical approach on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A real‐world multicenter study of a large Chinese cohort from 2006 to 2017
title_short Effect of the surgical approach on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A real‐world multicenter study of a large Chinese cohort from 2006 to 2017
title_sort effect of the surgical approach on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a real‐world multicenter study of a large chinese cohort from 2006 to 2017
topic Clinical Cancer Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7433827/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32628356
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3287
work_keys_str_mv AT guochenyan effectofthesurgicalapproachonsurvivaloutcomesinpatientsundergoingradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerarealworldmulticenterstudyofalargechinesecohortfrom2006to2017
AT tangxiaoyan effectofthesurgicalapproachonsurvivaloutcomesinpatientsundergoingradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerarealworldmulticenterstudyofalargechinesecohortfrom2006to2017
AT mengyan effectofthesurgicalapproachonsurvivaloutcomesinpatientsundergoingradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerarealworldmulticenterstudyofalargechinesecohortfrom2006to2017
AT zhangying effectofthesurgicalapproachonsurvivaloutcomesinpatientsundergoingradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerarealworldmulticenterstudyofalargechinesecohortfrom2006to2017
AT zhangxuyin effectofthesurgicalapproachonsurvivaloutcomesinpatientsundergoingradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerarealworldmulticenterstudyofalargechinesecohortfrom2006to2017
AT guojingjing effectofthesurgicalapproachonsurvivaloutcomesinpatientsundergoingradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerarealworldmulticenterstudyofalargechinesecohortfrom2006to2017
AT leixiaohong effectofthesurgicalapproachonsurvivaloutcomesinpatientsundergoingradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerarealworldmulticenterstudyofalargechinesecohortfrom2006to2017
AT qiujunjun effectofthesurgicalapproachonsurvivaloutcomesinpatientsundergoingradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerarealworldmulticenterstudyofalargechinesecohortfrom2006to2017
AT huakeqin effectofthesurgicalapproachonsurvivaloutcomesinpatientsundergoingradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerarealworldmulticenterstudyofalargechinesecohortfrom2006to2017