Abstract
Background
Prognostic factors related to survival in patients with inoperable metastatic or recurrent endometrial carcinoma (MREC) have remained unclear due to lack of clinical trials. The management of these patients is also controversial. This study was performed to compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles of two different systemic therapies (chemotherapy vs hormonal therapy) given for the treatment of patients with MREC and to identify the impact of various prognostic factors on the survival.
Methods
Between 1992 and 2004, 44 patients with MREC were admitted to our oncology department. Four cases were excluded from this retrospective study because of lack of data in their charts. Age, presence of other systemic diseases (such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension), histological type, tumor grade, stage, disease-free interval, site of recurrence or metastasis, systemic treatment modality, overall response to treatment, and duration of time to progression were evaluated as prognostic factors. Cox regression analysis was performed for identification of independent prognostic factors and differences between patients characteristics of two treatment groups were calculated by the chi-square or t test.
Results
The median follow-up was 18 mo (range 3–113). The overall response rates for chemotherapy and hormonal therapy group were 42% and 41%, respectively (p>0.05). The median time to progression was 4 mo for the chemotherapy group and 5 mo for the hormonal therapy group (P>0.05). The median survival after metastasis or recurrence was 11 mo for the chemotherapy group and 16 mo for the hormonal therapy group (p>0.05). In the group of chemotherapy, grade 3–4 hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were seen in eight and two, patients, respectively. No grade 3–4 toxicities were noted in patients treated with hormonal therapy. In multivariate analysis, only time to progression (p=0.001) and grade (p=0.04) were the independent prognostic factors on survival after metastasis or recurrence.
Conclusion
Histological differentiation and duration of time to progression are predictive factors for survival after metastasis or recurrence in the whole group. The efficacy of two different groups of treatment in these patients appears to be similar. But the chemotherapy may have some disadvantageous in terms of toxicity. This study supports a future randomized prospective trial of hormonal therapy vs chemotherapy in patients with MREC.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Creasman W.T. Endometrial cancer. Limited disease: role of surgery. Semin Oncol 1994;21: 79–83.
Pawinski A, et al. Cyclophosphamide or ifosfamide in patients with advanced and/or recurrent endometrial cacinoma: a randomised phase II study of the EORTC Gynecological Cancer Cooperative Group. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1999;86: 179–183.
Elit L., Hirte H. Current status and future innovations of hormonal agents, chemotherapy and investigational agents in endometrial cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2002;14: 67–73.
Lentz SS. Advanced and recurrent endometrial carcinoma: hormonal therapy. Semin Oncol 1994;21: 100–106.
Barakat RR, Park RC, Grigsby PW. Corpus: epithelial tumors. In: Hoskins WJ, Perez CA, Young RC (eds). Principles and Practice of Gynecologic Oncology. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, 1997, pp. 859–896.
Grigsby PW, et al. Clinical stage I endometrial cancer: prognostic factors for local control and distant metastasis and implications of the new FIGO surgical staging system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1992; 22: 905–911.
Mariani A, Webb MJ, Keeney GL, Aletti G, Podratz KC. Assessment of prognostic factors in stage IIIA endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2002;86: 38–44.
Steiner E, et al. Multivariate independent prognostic factors in endometrial carcinoma: a clinicopathologic study in 181 patients: 10 years experience at the department of obstetrics and gynecology of the Mainz University. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003;13:197–203.
Prat, J. Prognostic parameters of endometrial carcinoma. Hum Pathol 2004;35(6): 649–662.
Thigpen JT, Buchsbaum HJ, Mangan C, Blessing JA. Phase II trial of adriamycin in the treatment of advanced or recurrent endometrial carcinoma. A Gynecologic Oncology group study. Cancer Treat Rep 1979;63:21–27.
Thigpen JT, Blessing JA, Homesley H A phase II trial of cisplatin as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial carcinoma. A Gynecologic Ocology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 1989;33: 68–70.
Long HJ, Pfeifle DM, Wieand HS. Phase II evaluation of carboplatin in advanced endometrial carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 1988; 80: 276–278
Lincoln S, Blessing JA, Lee RB, Rocereto TF. Activity of paclitaxel as second-line chemotherapy in endometrial carcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 2003;88: 277–281.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Karagol, H., Saip, P., Uygun, K. et al. Evaluation of prognostic factors and comparison of systemic treatment modalities in patients with recurrent or metastatic endometrial carcinoma. Med Oncol 23, 543–548 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1385/MO:23:4:543
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1385/MO:23:4:543