Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Histologic grade and peritoneal cytology as prognostic factors in type 1 endometrial cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Prognostic clinicopathological factors for type 1 endometrial cancer are unknown and the purpose of the current study was to determine the independent prognostic variables for type 1 endometrial cancer.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of 168 patients with type 1 endometrial cancer primarily treated with comprehensive staging surgery. The median follow-up time was 68 (12–100) months. Independent risk factors for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined using multivariate Cox regression models. Sub-group analysis of stage I was also performed. We also assessed the patterns of failure among patients with recurrences and investigated the associations with the prognostic variables determined by multivariate analysis.

Results

Twenty patients (11.9%) had recurrence and 13 patients (7.7%) died of the disease overall. Multivariate analysis revealed that grade 2 (G2) histology (p = 0.008) and positive peritoneal cytology (p = 0.001) predicted the recurrent event in type 1 endometrial cancer. G2 histology (p = 0.007) and positive peritoneal cytology (p = 0.003) were also found to be independent risk factors for tumor-related deaths. Among stage I patients, G2 histology and positive peritoneal cytology were also independent prognostic variables for DFS and OS. Patients with G2 histology and/or positive peritoneal cytology were more likely to have recurrence at distant sites.

Conclusions

G2 histology and positive peritoneal cytology were independent prognostic factors for DFS and OS in type 1 endometrial cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hori M, Matsuda T, Shibata A et al (2015) Cancer incidence and incidence rates in Japan in 2009: a study of 32 population-based cancer registries for the Monitoring of Cancer Incidence in Japan (MCIJ) project. Jpn J Clin Oncol 45(9):884–891

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Doll A, Abal M, Rigau M et al (2008) Novel molecular profiles of endometrial cancer-new light through old windows. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 108:221–229

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Evans T, Sany O, Pearmain P et al (2011) Differential trends in the rising incidence of endometrial cancer by type: data from UK population-based registry from 1994 to 2006. Br J Cancer 104:1505–1510

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Mendivil A, Schuler KM, Gehrig PA (2009) Non-endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterine corpus: a review of selected histological subtypes. Cancer Control 16:46–52

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bansal N, Yendluri V, Wenham RM (2009) The molecular biology of endometrial cancers and the implications for pathogenesis, classification, and targeted therapies. Cancer Control 16:8–13

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Llobet D, Pallares J, Yeramian A et al (2009) Molecular pathology of endometrial carcinoma; practical aspects from the diagnostic and therapeutic viewpoints. J Clin Pathol 62:777–785

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Jolly S, Vargas CE, Kumar T et al (2006) The impact of age on long-term outcome in patients with endometrial cancer treated with postoperative radiation. Gynecol Oncol 103:87–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gadduci A, Cosio S, Fabrini MG et al (2011) Patterns of failures in endometrial cancer: clinicopathological variables predictive of the risk of local, distant and retroperitoneal failure. Anticancer Res 31:3483–3488

    Google Scholar 

  9. Abeler VM, Kjorstad KE (1991) Endometrial adenocarcinoma in Norway. A study of a total population. Cancer 67:3093–3103

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tewari KS, Filiaci VL, Spirtos NM et al (2012) Association of number of positive nodes and cervical stroma invasion with outcome of advanced endometrial cancer treated with chemotherapy or whole abdominal irradiation: a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 125:87–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kashimura M, Sugihara K, Toki N et al (1997) The significance of peritoneal cytology in uterine cervix and endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 67:285–290

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Obermair A, Geramou M, Tripcony L et al (2001) Peritoneal cytology: impact on disease-free survival in clinical stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterus. Cancer Lett 164:105–110

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Saga Y, Imai M, Jobo T et al (2006) Is peritoneal cytology a prognostic factor of endometrial cancer confined to the uterus? Gynecol Oncol 103:277–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Havrilesky LJ, Cragun JM, Calingaert B et al (2007) The prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology and adnexal/serosal metastasis in stage IIIA endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 104:401–405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Weinberg LE, Kunos CA, Zanotti KM (2013) Lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) is an isolated poor prognostic factor for recurrence and survival among women with intermediate- to high-risk early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 23:1438–1445

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kurman RJ, Carcangiu ML, Herrington CS et al (2014) WHO classification of tumours of female reproductive organs. IARC, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pecorelli S (2009) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105:103–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (2010) Evidenced-based guidelines for treatment of uterine body neoplasm in Japan: Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (JSGO) 2009 edition. Int J Clin Oncol 11:531–542

    Google Scholar 

  19. Voss MA, Ganesan R, Ludeman L et al (2012) Should grade 3 endometrial carcinoma be considered a type-2 cancer—a clinical and pathological evaluation. Gynecol Oncol 124:15–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Alvarez T, Miller E, Duska L et al (2012) Molecular profiles of grade 3 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma: is it a type I or type II endometrial carcinoma? Am J Surg Pathol 36:753–761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Takeshima N, Nishida H, Tabata T et al (2001) Positive peritoneal cytology in endometrial cancer: enhancement of other prognostic indicators. Gynecol Oncol 82:470–473

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wethington SL, Barrena Medel NI, Wright JD et al (2009) Prognostic significance and treatment implications of positive peritoneal cytology in endometrial adenocarcinoma: unraveling a mystery. Gynecol Oncol 115:18–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sutton GP (1989) Peritoneal cytology in endometrial carcinoma. Cancer Treat Res 49:41–52

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Konski A, Poulter C, Keys H, Rubin P et al (1988) Absence of prognostic significance, peritoneal dissemination and treatment advantage in endometrial cancer patients with positive peritoneal cytology. Int Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 14:49–55

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Imachi M, Tsukamoto N, Matsuyama T et al (1988) Peritoneal cytology in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 30:76–86

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kadar N, Homesley HD, Malfetano JH (1992) Positive peritoneal cytology is an adverse factor in endometrial carcinoma only if there is other evidence of extrauterine disease. Gynecol Oncol 46:145–149

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ebina Y, Hareyama H, Sakuragh N et al (1997) Peritoneal cytology and its prognostic value in endometrial carcinoma. Int Surg 82:244–248

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kasamatsu T, Onda T, Katsumata N et al (2003) Prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology in endometrial carcinoma confined to the uterus. Br J Cancer 88:245–250

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Mariani A, Webb MJ, Keeney GL et al (2002) Assessment of prognostic factors in stage IIIA endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 86:38–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Taskiran C, Yuce K, Geyik PO et al (2006) Predictability of retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis by using clinicopathologic variables in surgically staged endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 16:1342–1347

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fujiwara H, Saga Y, Takahashi K et al (2008) Omental metastases in clinical stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 18:165–167

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Metindir J, Dilek GB (2008) The role of omentectomy during the surgical staging in patients with clinical stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 134:1067–1070

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kyorin University School of Medicine, 6-20-2 Shinkawa, Mitaka, Tokyo, 181-8611, Japan

    Kei Tanaka, Yoichi Kobayashi, Kei Dozono, Momoe Watanabe, Hiromi Shibuya, Yoshiko Nishigaya, Mai Momomura, Hironori Matsumoto & Mitsutoshi Iwashita

  2. The Tokyo Dental College Ichikawa General Hospital, Ichikawa, Japan

    Juri Sugiyama & Kiyoshi Takamatsu

  3. The Japanese Red Cross Musashino Hospital, Musashino, Japan

    Tatsuo Yamazaki & Satoshi Umezawa

Authors
  1. Kei Tanaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yoichi Kobayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juri Sugiyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tatsuo Yamazaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kei Dozono
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Momoe Watanabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Hiromi Shibuya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yoshiko Nishigaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Mai Momomura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hironori Matsumoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Satoshi Umezawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Kiyoshi Takamatsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Mitsutoshi Iwashita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoichi Kobayashi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest, sources of financial support, corporate involvement, or patent holdings to disclose.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tanaka, K., Kobayashi, Y., Sugiyama, J. et al. Histologic grade and peritoneal cytology as prognostic factors in type 1 endometrial cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 22, 533–540 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-016-1079-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-016-1079-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation