Cargando…

Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB–IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study

OBJECTIVE: Revised staging of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer is based on clinical examination, imaging, and potential surgical findings. A known limitation of imaging techniques is an appreciable rate of understaging. In contrast, surgical staging may provide more accurate informatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Marnitz, Simone, Tsunoda, Audrey Tieko, Martus, Peter, Vieira, Marcelo, Affonso Junior, Renato Jose, Nunes, João, Budach, Volker, Hertel, Hermann, Mustea, Alexander, Sehouli, Jalid, Scharf, Jens-Peter, Ulrich, Uwe, Ebert, Andreas, Piwonski, Iris, Kohler, Christhardt
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7788482/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33293284
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-001973
_version_ 1783633041360420864
author Marnitz, Simone
Tsunoda, Audrey Tieko
Martus, Peter
Vieira, Marcelo
Affonso Junior, Renato Jose
Nunes, João
Budach, Volker
Hertel, Hermann
Mustea, Alexander
Sehouli, Jalid
Scharf, Jens-Peter
Ulrich, Uwe
Ebert, Andreas
Piwonski, Iris
Kohler, Christhardt
author_facet Marnitz, Simone
Tsunoda, Audrey Tieko
Martus, Peter
Vieira, Marcelo
Affonso Junior, Renato Jose
Nunes, João
Budach, Volker
Hertel, Hermann
Mustea, Alexander
Sehouli, Jalid
Scharf, Jens-Peter
Ulrich, Uwe
Ebert, Andreas
Piwonski, Iris
Kohler, Christhardt
author_sort Marnitz, Simone
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Revised staging of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer is based on clinical examination, imaging, and potential surgical findings. A known limitation of imaging techniques is an appreciable rate of understaging. In contrast, surgical staging may provide more accurate information on lymph node involvement. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the impact of pre-treatment surgical staging, including removal of bulky lymph nodes, on disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS: Uterus-11 was a prospective international multicenter study including patients with locally advanced cervical cancer who were randomized 1:1 to surgical staging (experimental arm) or clinical staging (control arm) followed by primary platinum-based chemoradiation. Patients with histologically proven squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous cancer International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IIB–IVA underwent gynecologic examination and pre-treatment imaging including abdominal computed tomography (CT) and/or abdominal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Patients had chest imaging (any of the following: X-ray, CT, or PET-CT). The primary endpoint was disease-free survival and the secondary endpoint was overall survival. An ad hoc analysis was performed after trial completion for cancer-specific survival. Randomization was conducted from February 2009 to August 2013. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients (surgical arm, n=130; clinical arm, n=125) with locally advanced cervical cancer were randomized. Of these, 240 patients were eligible for analysis. The two groups were comparable with respect to patient characteristics. The surgical approach was transperitoneal laparoscopy in most patients (96.6%). Laparoscopic staging led to upstaging in 39 of 120 (33%) patients. After a median follow-up of 90 months (range 1–123) in both arms, there was no difference in disease-free survival between the groups (p=0.084). For patients with FIGO stage IIB, surgical staging is superior to clinical staging with respect to disease-free survival (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.86, p=0.011). In the post-hoc analysis, surgical staging was associated with better cancer-specific survival (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.93, p=0.020). CONCLUSION: Our study did not show a difference in disease-free survival between surgical and clinical staging in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. There was a significant benefit in disease-free survival for patients with FIGO stage IIB and, in a post-hoc analysis, a cancer-specific survival benefit in favor of laparoscopic staging. The high risk of distant metastases in both arms emphasizes the need for further evaluation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7788482
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77884822021-01-14 Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB–IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study Marnitz, Simone Tsunoda, Audrey Tieko Martus, Peter Vieira, Marcelo Affonso Junior, Renato Jose Nunes, João Budach, Volker Hertel, Hermann Mustea, Alexander Sehouli, Jalid Scharf, Jens-Peter Ulrich, Uwe Ebert, Andreas Piwonski, Iris Kohler, Christhardt Int J Gynecol Cancer Original Research OBJECTIVE: Revised staging of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer is based on clinical examination, imaging, and potential surgical findings. A known limitation of imaging techniques is an appreciable rate of understaging. In contrast, surgical staging may provide more accurate information on lymph node involvement. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the impact of pre-treatment surgical staging, including removal of bulky lymph nodes, on disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS: Uterus-11 was a prospective international multicenter study including patients with locally advanced cervical cancer who were randomized 1:1 to surgical staging (experimental arm) or clinical staging (control arm) followed by primary platinum-based chemoradiation. Patients with histologically proven squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous cancer International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IIB–IVA underwent gynecologic examination and pre-treatment imaging including abdominal computed tomography (CT) and/or abdominal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Patients had chest imaging (any of the following: X-ray, CT, or PET-CT). The primary endpoint was disease-free survival and the secondary endpoint was overall survival. An ad hoc analysis was performed after trial completion for cancer-specific survival. Randomization was conducted from February 2009 to August 2013. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients (surgical arm, n=130; clinical arm, n=125) with locally advanced cervical cancer were randomized. Of these, 240 patients were eligible for analysis. The two groups were comparable with respect to patient characteristics. The surgical approach was transperitoneal laparoscopy in most patients (96.6%). Laparoscopic staging led to upstaging in 39 of 120 (33%) patients. After a median follow-up of 90 months (range 1–123) in both arms, there was no difference in disease-free survival between the groups (p=0.084). For patients with FIGO stage IIB, surgical staging is superior to clinical staging with respect to disease-free survival (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.86, p=0.011). In the post-hoc analysis, surgical staging was associated with better cancer-specific survival (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.93, p=0.020). CONCLUSION: Our study did not show a difference in disease-free survival between surgical and clinical staging in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. There was a significant benefit in disease-free survival for patients with FIGO stage IIB and, in a post-hoc analysis, a cancer-specific survival benefit in favor of laparoscopic staging. The high risk of distant metastases in both arms emphasizes the need for further evaluation. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-12 2020-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7788482/ /pubmed/33293284 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-001973 Text en © IGCS and ESGO 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, an indication of whether changes were made, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Marnitz, Simone
Tsunoda, Audrey Tieko
Martus, Peter
Vieira, Marcelo
Affonso Junior, Renato Jose
Nunes, João
Budach, Volker
Hertel, Hermann
Mustea, Alexander
Sehouli, Jalid
Scharf, Jens-Peter
Ulrich, Uwe
Ebert, Andreas
Piwonski, Iris
Kohler, Christhardt
Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB–IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study
title Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB–IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study
title_full Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB–IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study
title_fullStr Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB–IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study
title_full_unstemmed Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB–IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study
title_short Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB–IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study
title_sort surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer figo stages iib–iva: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (uterus-11) intergroup study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7788482/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33293284
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-001973
work_keys_str_mv AT marnitzsimone surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT tsunodaaudreytieko surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT martuspeter surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT vieiramarcelo surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT affonsojuniorrenatojose surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT nunesjoao surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT budachvolker surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT hertelhermann surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT musteaalexander surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT sehoulijalid surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT scharfjenspeter surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT ulrichuwe surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT ebertandreas surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT piwonskiiris surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy
AT kohlerchristhardt surgicalversusclinicalstagingpriortoprimarychemoradiationinpatientswithcervicalcancerfigostagesiibivaoncologicresultsofaprospectiverandomizedinternationalmulticenteruterus11intergroupstudy