Cargando…

Treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking

OBJECTIVE: Treatment strategies for bulky lymph nodes in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer scheduled for definitive chemoradiation include nodal boosting with radiotherapy, surgical debulking, or both. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare survival and toxicity in pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Olthof, Ester Paulien, Wenzel, Hans, van der Velden, Jacobus, Spijkerboer, Anje M, Bekkers, Ruud, Beltman, Jogchum J, Nijman, Hans W, Slangen, Brigitte, Smolders, Ramon, van Trommel, Nienke, Zusterzeel, Petra L M, Zweemer, Ronald, Stalpers, Lukas J A, van der Aa, Maaike, Mom, Constantijne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9279830/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35483738
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2022-003357
_version_ 1784746489636978688
author Olthof, Ester Paulien
Wenzel, Hans
van der Velden, Jacobus
Spijkerboer, Anje M
Bekkers, Ruud
Beltman, Jogchum J
Nijman, Hans W
Slangen, Brigitte
Smolders, Ramon
van Trommel, Nienke
Zusterzeel, Petra L M
Zweemer, Ronald
Stalpers, Lukas J A
van der Aa, Maaike
Mom, Constantijne
author_facet Olthof, Ester Paulien
Wenzel, Hans
van der Velden, Jacobus
Spijkerboer, Anje M
Bekkers, Ruud
Beltman, Jogchum J
Nijman, Hans W
Slangen, Brigitte
Smolders, Ramon
van Trommel, Nienke
Zusterzeel, Petra L M
Zweemer, Ronald
Stalpers, Lukas J A
van der Aa, Maaike
Mom, Constantijne
author_sort Olthof, Ester Paulien
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Treatment strategies for bulky lymph nodes in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer scheduled for definitive chemoradiation include nodal boosting with radiotherapy, surgical debulking, or both. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare survival and toxicity in patients receiving these treatments and to compare them with a group that received neither form of treatment. METHODS: Women diagnosed between January 2009 and January 2017 with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IB2, IIA2–IVA cervical cancer with lymph nodes ≥1.5 cm without upper limit on pretreatment imaging and treated with definitive chemoradiation were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were categorized by intention-to-treat strategy: boosting, debulking, or neither treatment, with subgroup analysis for patients receiving both treatments, that is, debulking with boosting. Overall and relapse-free survival outcomes were compared by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses and toxicity by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 190 patients, 101 (53%) received only nodal boosting, 31 (16%) debulking alone, 29 (15%) debulking combined with boosting, and 29 (15%) received neither treatment. The 5 year overall and relapse-free survival for the treatment groups were 58%, 45% and 45% (p=0.19), and 47%, 44% and 46% (p=0.87), respectively. Multivariable Cox regression analyses demonstrated no differences in overall and relapse-free survival. Combination of debulking with boosting was associated with decreased overall and relapse-free survival compared with debulking alone (HR 2.47, 95% CI 1.22 to 5.00; and HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.93). Nodal boosting was independently associated with a decreased toxicity risk compared with debulking strategy (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed no survival benefit from either nodal boosting or debulking strategy in patients with suspicious bulky nodes. Nodal boosting might, however, be associated with less toxicity. Dual treatment with debulking and boosting showed a worse survival outcome because this group probably represents patients with poor prognostic factors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9279830
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92798302022-08-01 Treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking Olthof, Ester Paulien Wenzel, Hans van der Velden, Jacobus Spijkerboer, Anje M Bekkers, Ruud Beltman, Jogchum J Nijman, Hans W Slangen, Brigitte Smolders, Ramon van Trommel, Nienke Zusterzeel, Petra L M Zweemer, Ronald Stalpers, Lukas J A van der Aa, Maaike Mom, Constantijne Int J Gynecol Cancer Original Research OBJECTIVE: Treatment strategies for bulky lymph nodes in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer scheduled for definitive chemoradiation include nodal boosting with radiotherapy, surgical debulking, or both. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare survival and toxicity in patients receiving these treatments and to compare them with a group that received neither form of treatment. METHODS: Women diagnosed between January 2009 and January 2017 with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IB2, IIA2–IVA cervical cancer with lymph nodes ≥1.5 cm without upper limit on pretreatment imaging and treated with definitive chemoradiation were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were categorized by intention-to-treat strategy: boosting, debulking, or neither treatment, with subgroup analysis for patients receiving both treatments, that is, debulking with boosting. Overall and relapse-free survival outcomes were compared by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses and toxicity by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 190 patients, 101 (53%) received only nodal boosting, 31 (16%) debulking alone, 29 (15%) debulking combined with boosting, and 29 (15%) received neither treatment. The 5 year overall and relapse-free survival for the treatment groups were 58%, 45% and 45% (p=0.19), and 47%, 44% and 46% (p=0.87), respectively. Multivariable Cox regression analyses demonstrated no differences in overall and relapse-free survival. Combination of debulking with boosting was associated with decreased overall and relapse-free survival compared with debulking alone (HR 2.47, 95% CI 1.22 to 5.00; and HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.93). Nodal boosting was independently associated with a decreased toxicity risk compared with debulking strategy (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed no survival benefit from either nodal boosting or debulking strategy in patients with suspicious bulky nodes. Nodal boosting might, however, be associated with less toxicity. Dual treatment with debulking and boosting showed a worse survival outcome because this group probably represents patients with poor prognostic factors. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-07 2022-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9279830/ /pubmed/35483738 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2022-003357 Text en © IGCS and ESGO 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Olthof, Ester Paulien
Wenzel, Hans
van der Velden, Jacobus
Spijkerboer, Anje M
Bekkers, Ruud
Beltman, Jogchum J
Nijman, Hans W
Slangen, Brigitte
Smolders, Ramon
van Trommel, Nienke
Zusterzeel, Petra L M
Zweemer, Ronald
Stalpers, Lukas J A
van der Aa, Maaike
Mom, Constantijne
Treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking
title Treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking
title_full Treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking
title_fullStr Treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking
title_full_unstemmed Treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking
title_short Treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking
title_sort treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9279830/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35483738
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2022-003357
work_keys_str_mv AT olthofesterpaulien treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT wenzelhans treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT vanderveldenjacobus treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT spijkerboeranjem treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT bekkersruud treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT beltmanjogchumj treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT nijmanhansw treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT slangenbrigitte treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT smoldersramon treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT vantrommelnienke treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT zusterzeelpetralm treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT zweemerronald treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT stalperslukasja treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT vanderaamaaike treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking
AT momconstantijne treatmentofbulkylymphnodesinlocallyadvancedcervicalcancerboostingversusdebulking