Top

BMC Cancer

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Cervical Cancer | Research

Effectiveness comparisons of various therapies for FIGO stage IB2/IIA2 cervical cancer: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Authors: Jing Cheng, Beibei Liu, Biao Wang, Xicui Long, Zhihong Li, Ruili Chen, Ruiting Wu, Lin Xu

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

Cervical cancer is a common malignancy of the female genital tract. Treatment options for cervical cancer patients diagnosed at FIGO (2009) stage IB2 and IIA2 remains controversial.

Methods

We perform a Bayesian network meta-analysis to directly or indirectly compare various interventions for FIGO (2009) IB2 and IIA2 disease, in order to improve our understand of the optimal treatment strategy for these women. Three databases were searched for articles published between 1971 and 2020. Data on included study characteristics, outcomes, and risk of bias were abstracted by two reviewers.

Results

Seven thousand four hundred eighty-six articles were identified. Thirteen randomized controlled trials of FIGO (2009) IB2 and IIA2 cervical cancer patients were included in the final analysis. These trials used six different interventions: concomitant chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), radical surgery (RS), radical surgery following chemoradiotherapy (CCRT+RS), neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery (NACT+RS), adjuvant radiotherapy followed by Radical surgery (RT + RS), radiotherapy alone (RT).SUCRA ranking of OS and Relapse identified CCRT+RS and CCRT as the best interventions, respectively. Systematic clustering analysis identified the CCRT group as a unique cluster.

Conclusion

These data suggest that CCRT may be the best approach for improving the clinical outcome of cervical cancer patients diagnosed at FIGO (2009) stage IB2/IIA2. Phase III randomized trials should be performed in order to robustly assess the relative efficacy of available treatment strategies in this disease context.

Available only for authorised users

Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492.CrossRefPubMed

Vu M, Yu J, Awolude OA, Chuang L. Cervical cancer worldwide. Curr Probl Cancer. 2018;42(5):457–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2018.06.003.CrossRefPubMed

Hsieh HY, Huang JW, Lu CH, Lin JC, Wang L. Definite chemoradiotherapy is a competent treatment option in FIGO stage IB2 cervical cancer compared with radical surgery +/− neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Formos Med Assoc. 2019;118(1 Pt 1):99–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2018.01.015.CrossRefPubMed

Thakur P. Prospective randomized study comparing concomitant chemoradiotherapy using weekly cisplatin and paclitaxel vs concomitant chemoradiotherapy using weekly cisplatin in locally advanced carcinoma cervix. J Cancer Res Ther. 2014;10:S45.

Li Z, Yang S, Liu L, Han S. A comparison of concurrent chemoradiotherapy and radiotherapy in Chinese patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma: a multi-center study. Radiat Oncol. 2014;9:212.CrossRef

Huang P, Zhou L, Wang LH, Li Y, Peng X, Zhu AN, et al. Clinical effect of preoperative chemoradiotherapy and radiotherapy for the patients with I B2 and II a cervical cancer. Chin J Cancer Prevent Treat. 2011;18(16):1290–2.

Yin M, Zhao F, Lou G, Zhang H, Sun M, Li C, et al. The long-term efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical hysterectomy compared with radical surgery alone or concurrent chemoradiotherapy on locally advanced-stage cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21(1):92–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181fe8b6e.CrossRefPubMed

Qin T, Zhen J, Zhou M, Wu H, Ren R, Qu B, et al. Efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus radical surgery in patients with bulky stage II cervical squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg. 2016;30:121–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.04.038.CrossRefPubMed

Hwang YY, Moon H, Cho SH, Kim KT, Moon YJ, Kim SR, et al. Ten-year survival of patients with locally advanced, stage ib-iib cervical cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;82(1):88–93. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.2001.6204.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Huguet F, Cojocariu OM, Levy P, Lefranc JP, Darai E, Jannet D, et al. Preoperative concurrent radiation therapy and chemotherapy for bulky stage IB2, IIA, and IIB carcinoma of the uterine cervix with proximal parametrial invasion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72(5):1508–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.03.054.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Peters Iii WA, Liu PY, Barrett Ii RJ, Stock RJ, Monk BJ, Berek JS, et al. Concurrent chemotherapy and pelvic radiation therapy compared with pelvic radiation therapy alone as adjuvant therapy after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage cancer of the cervix. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(8):1606–13. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2000.18.8.1606.CrossRef

12.

Li F, Wu Y, Kong W, Wang J, Hao X, Niu J, et al. Comparison of the effects of preoperative vaginal intracavitary irradiation plus surgery and surgery alone for stage I b2 and II a cervical cancer. Chin J Clin Oncol. 2008;35(14):797–800.

13.

Landoni F, Colombo A, Milani R, Placa F, Zanagnolo V, Mangioni C. Randomized study between radical surgery and radiotherapy for the treatment of stage IB–IIA cervical cancer: 20-year update. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017;28(3):e34. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2017.28.e34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Landoni F, Maneo A, Colombo A, Placa F, Milani R, Perego P, et al. Randomised study of radical surgery versus radiotherapy for stage Ib-IIa cervical cancer. Lancet. 1997;350(9077):535–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02250-2.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Frumovitz M, Obermair A, Coleman RL, Pareja R, Lopez A, Ribero R, et al. Quality of life in patients with cervical cancer after open versus minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (LACC): a secondary outcome of a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(6):851–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30081-4.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, Alahdab F. New evidence pyramid. Evid Based Med. 2016;21(4):125–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110401.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Tonin FS, Rotta I, Mendes AM, Pontarolo R. Network meta-analysis: a technique to gather evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. Pharm Pract. 2017;15(1):943. https://doi.org/10.18549/PharmPract.2017.01.943.CrossRef

18.

Mills EJ, Bansback N, Ghement I, Thorlund K, Kelly S, Puhan MA, et al. Multiple treatment comparison meta-analyses: a step forward into complexity. Clin Epidemiol. 2011;3:193–202. https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S16526.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Kiefer C, Sturtz S, Bender R. Indirect comparisons and network Meta-analyses. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112(47):803–8. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2015.0803.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Kruschke JK, Liddell TM. The Bayesian new statistics: hypothesis testing, estimation, meta-analysis, and power analysis from a Bayesian perspective. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018;25(1):178–206. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1221-4.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Laws A, Tao R, Wang S, Padhiar A, Goring S. A comparison of National Guidelines for network Meta-analysis. Value Health. 2019;22(10):1178–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.05.013.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Chandler J, Welch VA, Higgins JP, et al. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;10:Ed000142.PubMed

23.

Welch V, Petticrew M, Petkovic J, Moher D, Waters E, White H, et al. Extending the PRISMA statement to equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-E 2012): explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;70:68–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.09.001.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Turner RM, Jackson D, Wei Y, Thompson SG, Higgins JP. Predictive distributions for between-study heterogeneity and simple methods for their application in Bayesian meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2015;34(6):984–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6381.CrossRefPubMed

25.

van den Berg SM, Beem L, Boomsma DI. Fitting genetic models using Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms with BUGS. Twin Res Hum Genet. 2006;9(3):334–42. https://doi.org/10.1375/twin.9.3.334.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Shim SR, Kim SJ, Lee J, Rücker G. Network meta-analysis: application and practice using R software. Epidemiol Health. 2019;41:e2019013. https://doi.org/10.4178/epih.e2019013.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Toft N, Innocent GT, Gettinby G, Reid SW. Assessing the convergence of Markov chain Monte Carlo methods: an example from evaluation of diagnostic tests in absence of a gold standard. Prev Vet Med. 2007;79(2–4):244–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.01.003.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Sampson M, Tricco AC, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):e1002028. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002028.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Neupane B, Richer D, Bonner AJ, Kibret T, Beyene J. Network meta-analysis using R: a review of currently available automated packages. PLoS One. 2014;9(12):e115065. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115065.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

van Valkenhoef G, Dias S, Ades AE, Welton NJ. Automated generation of node-splitting models for assessment of inconsistency in network meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2016;7(1):80–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1167.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Gupta S, Maheshwari A, Parab P, Mahantshetty U, Hawaldar R, Sastri Chopra S, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery versus concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with stage IB2, IIA, or IIB squamous cervical Cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(16):1548–55. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2017.75.9985.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Li C, Xu S, Zhou L, Zhu Y. Preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. Chin J Clin Oncol. 2010;37(21):1242–1244+1248.

33.

Curtin JP, Hoskins WJ, Venkatraman ES, Almadrones L, Podratz KC, Long H, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy versus chemotherapy plus pelvic irradiation for high-risk cervical cancer patients after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy (RH-PLND): a randomized phase III trial. Gynecol Oncol. 1996;61(1):3–10. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.1996.0087.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Benedetti-Panici P, Greggi S, Colombo A, Amoroso M, Smaniotto D, Giannarelli D, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical surgery versus exclusive radiotherapy in locally advanced squamous cell cervical cancer: results from the Italian multicenter randomized study. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(1):179–88. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2002.20.1.179.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Chang TC, Lai CH, Hong JH, Hsueh S, Huang KG, Chou HH, et al. Randomized trial of neoadjuvant cisplatin, vincristine, bleomycin, and radical hysterectomy versus radiation therapy for bulky stage IB and IIA cervical cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(8):1740–7. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2000.18.8.1740.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Wang X, Chen J, Sun W, Zhu M, Li D, Chen G. Influences of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on clinical indicators, prognosis and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio of stage IB2-IIB cervical cancer. J BUON. 2020;25(2):757–63.PubMed

37.

Chen H, Liang C, Zhang L, Huang S, Wu X. Clinical efficacy of modified preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced (stage IB2 to IIB) ervical ancer: randomized study. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110(3):308–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.05.026.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Duan L, Zhang K, Wang Y, Jin J, Xie J, Luo X, et al. Effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with cervical cancer radical surgery for the treatment of cervical cancer. Biomed Res. 2017;28(22):9745–8.

39.

Katsumata N, Yoshikawa H, Kobayashi H, Saito T, Kuzuya K, Nakanishi T, et al. Phase III randomised controlled trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus radical surgery vs radical surgery alone for stages IB2, IIA2, and IIB cervical cancer: a Japan clinical oncology group trial (JCOG 0102). Br J Cancer. 2013;108(10):1957–63. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.179.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Perez CA, Camel HM, Kao MS, Hederman MA. Randomized study of preoperative radiation and surgery or irradiation alone in the treatment of stage IB and IIA carcinoma of the uterine. Gynecol Oncol. 1987;27(2):129–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-8258(87)90285-X.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Wardak S. Human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical cancer. Med Dosw Mikrobiol. 2016;68(1):73–84.PubMed

42.

Matsuo K, Machida H, Mandelbaum RS, Konishi I, Mikami M. Validation of the 2018 FIGO cervical cancer staging system. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;152(1):87–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.10.026.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Datta NR, Stutz E, Liu M, Rogers S, Klingbiel D, Siebenhüner A, et al. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy vs. radiotherapy alone in locally advanced cervix cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145(2):374–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.01.033.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Rose PG. Chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38(2):270–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8049(01)00352-5.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Green J, Kirwan J, Tierney J, Symonds P, Fresco L, Williams C, et al. Concomitant chemotherapy and radiation therapy for cancer of the uterine cervix. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002225.pub2.

46.

Gadducci A, Landoni F, Cosio S, Zizioli V, Zola P, Ferrero AM, et al. Neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy followed by radical hysterectomy for stage Ib2-IIb adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix - an Italian multicenter retrospective study. Anticancer Res. 2018;38(6):3627–34. https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.12637.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Yang Z, Chen D, Zhang J, Yao D, Gao K, Wang H, et al. The efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer: a randomized multicenter study. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;141(2):231–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.06.027.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Lee J, Kim TH, Kim GE, Keum KC, Kim YB. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery has no therapeutic advantages over concurrent chemoradiotherapy in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB-IIB cervical cancer. J Gynecol Oncol. 2016;27(5):e52. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2016.27.e52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

49.

Salanti G. Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool. Res Synth Methods. 2012;3(2):80–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1037.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Jansen JP, Crawford B, Bergman G, Stam W. Bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons: an introduction to mixed treatment comparisons. Value Health. 2008;11(5):956–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00347.x.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Effectiveness comparisons of various therapies for FIGO stage IB2/IIA2 cervical cancer: a Bayesian network meta-analysis
Authors: Jing Cheng
Beibei Liu
Biao Wang
Xicui Long
Zhihong Li
Ruili Chen
Ruiting Wu
Lin Xu
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Cervical Cancer
Cervical Cancer
Radiotherapy
Hysterectomy
Cytostatic Therapy
Published in: BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-08685-9

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Evaluating essential medicines for treating childhood cancers: availability, price and affordability study in Ghana

LncRNA MT1JP plays a protective role in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma by regulating miR-18a-5p/FBP1 axis

Five metastasis-related mRNAs signature predicting the survival of patients with liver hepatocellular carcinoma

Efficacy of osimertinib for preventing leptomeningeal metastasis derived from advanced EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: a propensity-matched retrospective study

Knowledge of a cancer diagnosis is a protective factor for the survival of patients with breast cancer: a retrospective cohort study

Single nucleotide variants in immune-response genes and the tumor microenvironment composition predict progression of mantle cell lymphoma

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer