Top

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Published in:

01-03-2021 | Human Papillomavirus | Gynecologic Oncology

Comparison of the survival outcome of neoadjuvant therapy followed by radical surgery with that of concomitant chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage IB2–IIIB cervical adenocarcinoma

Authors: Tian Tian, Xudong Gao, Yunhe Ju, Xiang Ding, Yiqin Ai

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 3/2021

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the survival outcome of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) (chemotherapy or chemotherapy and intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) followed by radical surgery and of concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with locally advanced cervical adenocarcinoma and identify predictors of cervical adenocarcinoma.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed our medical records of cervical adenocarcinoma patients treated with either NAT + surgery or CCRT in our institution from January 2013 to December 2017. The patients were treated with two-dimensional radiotherapy or three-dimensional-conformal or intensity-modulated radiotherapy combined with intracavitary brachytherapy. The regimen of concomitant chemotherapy was weekly cisplatin. The neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) was paclitaxel plus cisplatin. The primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

We enrolled 121 patients. There were 42 (34.7%) patients in the NAT + surgery group and 79 (65.3%) in the CCRT group. After univariate multivariate analysis, NAT was an independent predictor of OS (p = 0.008) and PFS (p = 0.006). After propensity score matching, the 5-year OS rates in the NAT + surgery and CCRT groups were 25% and 4%, respectively (p = 0.00014), and the 5-year PFS rates were 25% and 4%, respectively (p = 0.00015). Subgroup analysis showed that the 5-year OS and PFS rates in the NACT + surgery and CCRT groups were both 20% and 8%, respectively (p = 0.015).

Conclusion

Compared with CCRT, NAT followed by radical surgery had better OS and PFS in locally advanced cervical adenocarcinoma. In subgroup analysis, OS and PFS were longer for NACT + surgery than for CCRT.

Arbyn M, Weiderpass E, Bruni L, de Sanjosé S, Saraiya M, Ferlay J et al (2020) Estimates of incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in 2018: a worldwide analysis. Lancet Glob Heal 8:e191–203CrossRef

do Rozario S, da Silva IF, Koifman RJ, da Silva IF (2019) Characterization of women with cervical cancer assisted at Inca by histological type. Rev Saude Publica 53:88CrossRef

Brisson M, Kim JJ, Canfell K, Drolet M, Gingras G, Burger EA et al (2020) Impact of HPV vaccination and cervical screening on cervical cancer elimination: a comparative modelling analysis in 78 low-income and lower-middle-income countries. Lancet 395:575–590CrossRef

Bray F, Carstensen B, Møller H, Zappa M, Žakelj MP, Lawrence G et al (2005) Incidence trends of adenocarcinoma of the cervix in 13 European countries. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14:2191–2199CrossRef

Galic V, Herzog TJ, Lewin SN, Neugut AI, Burke WM, Lu Y et al (2012) Prognostic significance of adenocarcinoma histology in women with cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 125:287–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.01.012(Internet)CrossRefPubMed

Hu Z, Zhu D, Wang W, Li W, Jia W, Zeng X et al (2015) Genome-wide profiling of HPV integration in cervical cancer identifies clustered genomic hot spots and a potential microhomology-mediated integration mechanism. Nat Genet 47:158–163CrossRef

Hu K, Wang W, Liu X, Meng Q, Zhang F (2018) Comparison of treatment outcomes between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of cervix after definitive radiotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Radiat Oncol 13:1–7CrossRef

Yin K, Lu C, Lin J, Hsu C, Wang L (2018) Treatment outcomes of locally advanced cervical cancer by histopathological types in a single institution: a propensity score matching study. J Formos Med Assoc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2018.07.002(Internet)CrossRefPubMed

Thomas GM (2015) Locally advanced adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinomas of the cervix compared to squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix in Gynecologic Oncology Group trials of cisplatin-based chemoradiation. Gynecol Oncol 135:208–212

10.

Bhatla N, Aoki D, Sharma DN, Sankaranarayanan R (2018) Cancer of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynecol Obstet 143:22–36CrossRef

11.

Cibula D, Pötter R, Planchamp F, Avall-Lundqvist E, Fischerova D, Haie Meder C et al (2018) The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 28:641–655CrossRef

12.

Koh W, Abu-rustum NR, Bean S, Bradley K, Campos SM, Cho KR, et al. (2019) Cervical Cancer, Version 3.2019. 17:64–84

13.

Vale C, Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Brady M, Dinshaw K, Jakobsen A et al (2008) Reducing uncertainties about the effects of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 18 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 26:5802–5812CrossRef

14.

Shrivastava S, Mahantshetty U, Engineer R, Chopra S, Hawaldar R, Hande V et al (2018) Cisplatin chemoradiotherapy vs radiotherapy in FIGO stage IIIB squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 4:506–513CrossRef

15.

Rydzewska L, Tierney J, Vale CL, Symonds PR (2012) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery versus surgery for cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012

16.

Chen H, Liang C, Zhang L, Huang S, Wu X (2008) Clinical efficacy of modified preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced (stage IB2 to IIB) ervical ancer: randomized study. Gynecol Oncol 110:308–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.05.026(Internet)CrossRefPubMed

17.

Cai HB, Chen HZ, Yin HH (2006) Randomized study of preoperative chemotherapy versus primary surgery for stage IB cervical cancer. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 32:315–323CrossRef

18.

Katsumata N, Yoshikawa H, Kobayashi H, Saito T, Kuzuya K, Nakanishi T et al (2013) 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 108:1957–1963. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.179(Internet)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Eddy GL, Bundy BN, Creasman WT, Spirtos NM, Mannel RS, Hannigan E et al (2007) Treatment of (“bulky”) stage IB cervical cancer with or without neoadjuvant vincristine and cisplatin prior to radical hysterectomy and pelvic/para-aortic lymphadenectomy: a phase III trial of the gynecologic oncology group. Gynecol Oncol 106:362–369CrossRef

20.

Gupta S, Maheshwari A, Parab P, Mahantshetty U, Hawaldar R, Sastri S, Kerkar R et al (2018) 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 36:1548–1555CrossRef

21.

Yin M, Zhao F, Lou G, Zhang H, Sun M, Li C et al (2011) 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 21:92–99PubMed

22.

Minig L, Colombo N, Zanagnolo V, Landoni F, Bocciolone L, Cárdenas-Rebollo JM et al (2013) Platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery for cervical carcinoma international federation of gynecology and obstetrics stage IB2-IIB. Int J Gynecol Cancer 23:1647–1654CrossRef

23.

Wang W, Liu X, Meng Q, Zhang F, Hu K (2018) Prophylactic extended-field irradiation for patients with cervical cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy: a propensity-score matching analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 28:1584–1591CrossRef

24.

Platt SL, Patel A, Humphrey PJ, Al-Booz H, Bailey J (2019) Completion surgery after chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer–is there a role? UK Cancer Centre experience of hysterectomy post chemo-radiotherapy treatment for cervical cancer. J Obstet Gynaecol 39:68–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443615.2018.1463205(Internet)CrossRefPubMed

25.

Favero G, Pierobon J, Genta ML, Araújo MP, Miglino G, Del Carmen Pilar Diz M et al (2014) Laparoscopic extrafascial hysterectomy (completion surgery) after primary chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer: technical aspects and operative outcomes. Int J Gynecol Cancer 24:608–614CrossRef

26.

Yang J, Yang J, Cao D, Shen K, Ma J, Zhang F (2020) Completion hysterectomy after chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced adeno-type cervical carcinoma: updated survival outcomes and experience in post radiation surgery. J Gynecol Oncol 31:1–12CrossRef

Title: Comparison of the survival outcome of neoadjuvant therapy followed by radical surgery with that of concomitant chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage IB2–IIIB cervical adenocarcinoma
Authors: Tian Tian
Xudong Gao
Yunhe Ju
Xiang Ding
Yiqin Ai
Publication date: 01-03-2021
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Human Papillomavirus
Cervical Cancer
Cervical Cancer
Radiotherapy
Cytostatic Therapy
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 3/2021
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05826-6

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Comparison of the survival outcome of neoadjuvant therapy followed by radical surgery with that of concomitant chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage IB2–IIIB cervical adenocarcinoma

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2021

Comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes of pregnant women whose anemia was not corrected before delivery and pregnant women who were treated with intravenous iron in the third trimester

Reply to “Letter to the editor related to the article “Stress in couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology””

Optimisation and evaluation of the random forest model in the efficacy prediction of chemoradiotherapy for advanced cervical cancer based on radiomics signature from high-resolution T2 weighted images

Letter to the editor related to the article “stress in couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology” published by Tuncay et al.

Correction to: Reproductive outcomes in women and men using complementary and alternative medicine treatment and not receiving artificial reproductive technology: a systematic review

A proposal for hemostatic procedure at cervical punch biopsy