Cargando…

Prognostic factors and treatment comparison in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix based on population analyses

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the impact of the treatment modality on the outcome of small cell neuroendocrine cervical carcinoma (SCNEC) using the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. METHODS: Patients from the SEER program between 1981 and 2014 were identified. Significant fa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lin, Li‐mei, Lin, Qin, Liu, Jun, Chu, Ke‐xin, Huang, Yun‐Xia, Zhang, Zong‐Kai, Li, Tao, Dai, Ya‐Qing, Li, Jin‐Luan
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/PMC7520332/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32705800
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3326
_version_ 1783587764518780928
author Lin, Li‐mei
Lin, Qin
Liu, Jun
Chu, Ke‐xin
Huang, Yun‐Xia
Zhang, Zong‐Kai
Li, Tao
Dai, Ya‐Qing
Li, Jin‐Luan
author_facet Lin, Li‐mei
Lin, Qin
Liu, Jun
Chu, Ke‐xin
Huang, Yun‐Xia
Zhang, Zong‐Kai
Li, Tao
Dai, Ya‐Qing
Li, Jin‐Luan
author_sort Lin, Li‐mei
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the impact of the treatment modality on the outcome of small cell neuroendocrine cervical carcinoma (SCNEC) using the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. METHODS: Patients from the SEER program between 1981 and 2014 were identified. Significant factors for cancer‐specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan‐Meier survival and Cox regression methods. RESULTS: A total of 503 SCNEC patients were identified. The 5‐year CSS and OS were 36.6% and 30.6%, respectively. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I to IV distributions was 189 (37.6%), 108 (21.5%), 95 (18.9%), and 111 patients (22.0%), respectively. Within the patients with known treatment strategies, 177 (45.9%) were treated with radical surgery and 209 (54.1%) underwent primary radiotherapy. Local treatment strategies were independent prognostic factor for CSS and OS. The 5‐year CSS for radical surgery and primary radiotherapy was 50.0% and 27.9%, respectively (P < .001). The 5‐year OS for those who received radical surgery and primary radiotherapy was 57.8%, and 29.6%, respectively (P < .001). In FIGO stage I SCNEC, patients treated with radical surgery had superior CSS (P = .001) and OS (P = .003) than those with primary radiotherapy. However, in FIGO stage II and III SCNEC, there were no differences in CSS and OS with respect to different local treatment strategies. Our results also found that the addition of brachytherapy impacted OS in the FIGO stage III SENCE (P = .002). The 5‐year CSS and OS of patients with FIGO IV were only 11.7% and 7.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SCNEC is a rare disease with aggressive clinical behavior. The findings indicate that radical surgery should be suggested for early‐stage SCNEC and combining radiation therapy with brachytherapy should be suitable for patients with advanced stage.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7520332
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75203322020-09-30 Prognostic factors and treatment comparison in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix based on population analyses Lin, Li‐mei Lin, Qin Liu, Jun Chu, Ke‐xin Huang, Yun‐Xia Zhang, Zong‐Kai Li, Tao Dai, Ya‐Qing Li, Jin‐Luan Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the impact of the treatment modality on the outcome of small cell neuroendocrine cervical carcinoma (SCNEC) using the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. METHODS: Patients from the SEER program between 1981 and 2014 were identified. Significant factors for cancer‐specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan‐Meier survival and Cox regression methods. RESULTS: A total of 503 SCNEC patients were identified. The 5‐year CSS and OS were 36.6% and 30.6%, respectively. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I to IV distributions was 189 (37.6%), 108 (21.5%), 95 (18.9%), and 111 patients (22.0%), respectively. Within the patients with known treatment strategies, 177 (45.9%) were treated with radical surgery and 209 (54.1%) underwent primary radiotherapy. Local treatment strategies were independent prognostic factor for CSS and OS. The 5‐year CSS for radical surgery and primary radiotherapy was 50.0% and 27.9%, respectively (P < .001). The 5‐year OS for those who received radical surgery and primary radiotherapy was 57.8%, and 29.6%, respectively (P < .001). In FIGO stage I SCNEC, patients treated with radical surgery had superior CSS (P = .001) and OS (P = .003) than those with primary radiotherapy. However, in FIGO stage II and III SCNEC, there were no differences in CSS and OS with respect to different local treatment strategies. Our results also found that the addition of brachytherapy impacted OS in the FIGO stage III SENCE (P = .002). The 5‐year CSS and OS of patients with FIGO IV were only 11.7% and 7.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SCNEC is a rare disease with aggressive clinical behavior. The findings indicate that radical surgery should be suggested for early‐stage SCNEC and combining radiation therapy with brachytherapy should be suitable for patients with advanced stage. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7520332/ /pubmed/32705800 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3326 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
Lin, Li‐mei
Lin, Qin
Liu, Jun
Chu, Ke‐xin
Huang, Yun‐Xia
Zhang, Zong‐Kai
Li, Tao
Dai, Ya‐Qing
Li, Jin‐Luan
Prognostic factors and treatment comparison in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix based on population analyses
title Prognostic factors and treatment comparison in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix based on population analyses
title_full Prognostic factors and treatment comparison in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix based on population analyses
title_fullStr Prognostic factors and treatment comparison in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix based on population analyses
title_full_unstemmed Prognostic factors and treatment comparison in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix based on population analyses
title_short Prognostic factors and treatment comparison in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix based on population analyses
title_sort prognostic factors and treatment comparison in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix based on population analyses
topic Clinical Cancer Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7520332/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32705800
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3326
work_keys_str_mv AT linlimei prognosticfactorsandtreatmentcomparisoninsmallcellneuroendocrinecarcinomaoftheuterinecervixbasedonpopulationanalyses
AT linqin prognosticfactorsandtreatmentcomparisoninsmallcellneuroendocrinecarcinomaoftheuterinecervixbasedonpopulationanalyses
AT liujun prognosticfactorsandtreatmentcomparisoninsmallcellneuroendocrinecarcinomaoftheuterinecervixbasedonpopulationanalyses
AT chukexin prognosticfactorsandtreatmentcomparisoninsmallcellneuroendocrinecarcinomaoftheuterinecervixbasedonpopulationanalyses
AT huangyunxia prognosticfactorsandtreatmentcomparisoninsmallcellneuroendocrinecarcinomaoftheuterinecervixbasedonpopulationanalyses
AT zhangzongkai prognosticfactorsandtreatmentcomparisoninsmallcellneuroendocrinecarcinomaoftheuterinecervixbasedonpopulationanalyses
AT litao prognosticfactorsandtreatmentcomparisoninsmallcellneuroendocrinecarcinomaoftheuterinecervixbasedonpopulationanalyses
AT daiyaqing prognosticfactorsandtreatmentcomparisoninsmallcellneuroendocrinecarcinomaoftheuterinecervixbasedonpopulationanalyses
AT lijinluan prognosticfactorsandtreatmentcomparisoninsmallcellneuroendocrinecarcinomaoftheuterinecervixbasedonpopulationanalyses