Is primary chemoradiation a better treatment? A retrospective study of early-stage node-positive cervical cancer

Background: Cervical cancer is the second most frequently diagnosed cancer and the third leading cause of cancer death for women in developing countries. Radical hysterectomy with bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection is usually preferred for patients with stage IB1-IIA2 disease. Currently, imaging...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nan Zhang, Hong Zheng
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: IMR Press 2021-12-01
Series:Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.imrpress.com/journal/CEOG/48/6/10.31083/j.ceog4806216
_version_ 1811256410589102080
author Nan Zhang
Hong Zheng
author_facet Nan Zhang
Hong Zheng
author_sort Nan Zhang
collection DOAJ
description Background: Cervical cancer is the second most frequently diagnosed cancer and the third leading cause of cancer death for women in developing countries. Radical hysterectomy with bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection is usually preferred for patients with stage IB1-IIA2 disease. Currently, imaging has certain limitations in the diagnosis of lymph node metastasis, and the accuracy of detection remains unsatisfactory. Indeed, only pathological examination after removal of the suspected metastatic lymph nodes during surgery can conclusively identify the presence of metastasis. Furthermore, if a lymphatic metastasis is detected, there are no clear guidelines regarding whether to complete radical surgery or to conduct a systematic lymphadenectomy followed by adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy. This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the two treatment modalities in this patient population. Methods: Forty-nine stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer patients with lymphatic metastasis confirmed by systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymph node dissection from 2007 to 2018 were reviewed. The patients were treated with either primary chemoradiation or radical hysterectomy followed by adjuvant chemoradiation after lymphadenectomy. Survival states and adverse events of the two treatments were compared. Results: The median follow-up time was 45 (range 11–119 months) months. In the non-radical surgery group, one patient (1/15, 6.7%) relapsed and died, while in the radical surgery group, seven patients (7/27, 25.9%) relapsed and five (5/27, 18.5%) died. A significant difference was found in the mean progression-free survival (PFS) between the two groups, which was 69 (95% confidence interval 49.118–88.882) months in the non-radical surgery group and 44 (95% confidence interval 35.857–52.143) months in the radical surgery group (p < 0.01). There was a significant difference in three-year PFS (86% vs. 71%, p < 0.01) between the groups. Grade 3–4 toxicity was comparable between the two groups (26.7% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.958). Conclusion: For stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer patients with positive lymph nodes, primary chemoradiation after pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy seems to have better survival outcomes compared with radical hysterectomy by laparoscopy plus chemoradiation. Since this is a retrospective study with limited cases, evidence from a randomized controlled study is needed to confirm the optimal treatment for early-stage node-positive cervical cancer.
first_indexed 2024-04-12T17:39:57Z
format Article
id doaj.art-c16ee726a21742eaaea12094cd31c920
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 0390-6663
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-12T17:39:57Z
publishDate 2021-12-01
publisher IMR Press
record_format Article
series Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology
spelling doaj.art-c16ee726a21742eaaea12094cd31c9202022-12-22T03:22:50ZengIMR PressClinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology0390-66632021-12-014861363136710.31083/j.ceog4806216S0390-6663(21)01638-9Is primary chemoradiation a better treatment? A retrospective study of early-stage node-positive cervical cancerNan Zhang0Hong Zheng1Department of Gynecology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research, Ministry of Education of People’s Republic of China, 100142 Beijing, ChinaDepartment of Gynecology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research, Ministry of Education of People’s Republic of China, 100142 Beijing, ChinaBackground: Cervical cancer is the second most frequently diagnosed cancer and the third leading cause of cancer death for women in developing countries. Radical hysterectomy with bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection is usually preferred for patients with stage IB1-IIA2 disease. Currently, imaging has certain limitations in the diagnosis of lymph node metastasis, and the accuracy of detection remains unsatisfactory. Indeed, only pathological examination after removal of the suspected metastatic lymph nodes during surgery can conclusively identify the presence of metastasis. Furthermore, if a lymphatic metastasis is detected, there are no clear guidelines regarding whether to complete radical surgery or to conduct a systematic lymphadenectomy followed by adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy. This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the two treatment modalities in this patient population. Methods: Forty-nine stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer patients with lymphatic metastasis confirmed by systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymph node dissection from 2007 to 2018 were reviewed. The patients were treated with either primary chemoradiation or radical hysterectomy followed by adjuvant chemoradiation after lymphadenectomy. Survival states and adverse events of the two treatments were compared. Results: The median follow-up time was 45 (range 11–119 months) months. In the non-radical surgery group, one patient (1/15, 6.7%) relapsed and died, while in the radical surgery group, seven patients (7/27, 25.9%) relapsed and five (5/27, 18.5%) died. A significant difference was found in the mean progression-free survival (PFS) between the two groups, which was 69 (95% confidence interval 49.118–88.882) months in the non-radical surgery group and 44 (95% confidence interval 35.857–52.143) months in the radical surgery group (p < 0.01). There was a significant difference in three-year PFS (86% vs. 71%, p < 0.01) between the groups. Grade 3–4 toxicity was comparable between the two groups (26.7% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.958). Conclusion: For stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer patients with positive lymph nodes, primary chemoradiation after pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy seems to have better survival outcomes compared with radical hysterectomy by laparoscopy plus chemoradiation. Since this is a retrospective study with limited cases, evidence from a randomized controlled study is needed to confirm the optimal treatment for early-stage node-positive cervical cancer.https://www.imrpress.com/journal/CEOG/48/6/10.31083/j.ceog4806216cervical cancerlymphatic metastasisradical hysterectomy
spellingShingle Nan Zhang
Hong Zheng
Is primary chemoradiation a better treatment? A retrospective study of early-stage node-positive cervical cancer
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology
cervical cancer
lymphatic metastasis
radical hysterectomy
title Is primary chemoradiation a better treatment? A retrospective study of early-stage node-positive cervical cancer
title_full Is primary chemoradiation a better treatment? A retrospective study of early-stage node-positive cervical cancer
title_fullStr Is primary chemoradiation a better treatment? A retrospective study of early-stage node-positive cervical cancer
title_full_unstemmed Is primary chemoradiation a better treatment? A retrospective study of early-stage node-positive cervical cancer
title_short Is primary chemoradiation a better treatment? A retrospective study of early-stage node-positive cervical cancer
title_sort is primary chemoradiation a better treatment a retrospective study of early stage node positive cervical cancer
topic cervical cancer
lymphatic metastasis
radical hysterectomy
url https://www.imrpress.com/journal/CEOG/48/6/10.31083/j.ceog4806216
work_keys_str_mv AT nanzhang isprimarychemoradiationabettertreatmentaretrospectivestudyofearlystagenodepositivecervicalcancer
AT hongzheng isprimarychemoradiationabettertreatmentaretrospectivestudyofearlystagenodepositivecervicalcancer