Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perineural invasion as a prognostic factor for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Review
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Recent observational studies have reported that perineural invasion (PNI) may be a negative prognostic factor in cervical cancer.

Objectives

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to systematically analyse the effect of PNI on overall survival and disease-free survival.

Search strategy

The PubMed and Cochrane clinical trials databases were searched for articles with publication dates up to September 2013.

Selection criteria

Retrospective observational studies with survival analysis for perineural invasion after radical hysterectomy plus lymphadenectomy of cervical cancer were selected.

Data collection and analysis

Trial characteristics and outcomes and quality measures based on the Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) were independently extracted. The overall survival and disease-free survival of patients with PNI were measured using a hazard ratio (HR) for time to event outcomes.

Main results

The meta-analysis of these studies demonstrated that cervical cancer with PNI was associated with a lower overall survival rate (HR 2.21, 95 % CI 1.36–3.59, P = 0.001). Although the disease-free survival was lower in the PNI group (HR 1.35, 95 % CI 0.78–2.31, P = 0.28), the results were not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Patients with PNI-positive cervical cancer have a poor overall survival rate; therefore, we can conclude that perineural invasion (PNI) is an adverse prognostic factor in cervical cancer. Based on these results, PNI should be an independent prognostic factor for cervical cancer and the decision to proceed with adjuvant therapy after surgery.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Neumann E (1862) Secondare cancroid infiltration des nervus mentalis bei einem. Arch Pathol Anat 24:201–201

  2. Liebig C, Ayala G, Wilks JA, Berger DH, Albo D (2009) Perineural invasion in cancer: a review of the literature. Cancer 115(15):3379–3391

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Carter RL, Foster CS, Dinsdale EA, Pittam MR (1983) Perineural spread by squamous carcinomas of the head and neck: a morphological study using antiaxonal and antimyelin monoclonal antibodies. J Clin Pathol 36:269–275

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Soo KC, Carter RL, O’Brien CJ et al (1986) Prognostic implications of perineural spread in squamous carcinomas of the head and neck. Laryngoscope 96:1145–1148

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Maru N, Ohori M, Kattan MW et al (2001) Prognostic significance of the diameter of perineural invasion in radical prostatectomy specimens. Hum Pathol 32:828–833

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ayala GE, Dai H, Ittmann M et al (2004) Growth and survival mechanisms associated with perineural invasion in prostate cancer. Cancer Res 64:6082–6090

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Matsushima T, Mori M, Kido A et al (1998) Preoperative estimation of neural invasion in rectal carcinoma. Oncol Rep 5:73–76

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ross A, Rusnak C, Weinerman B et al (1999) Recurrence and survival after surgical management of rectal cancer. Am J Surg 177:392–395

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pour PM, Bell RH, Batra SK (2003) Neural invasion in the staging of pancreatic cancer. Pancreas 26:322–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hirai I, Kimura W, Ozawa K et al (2002) Perineural invasion in pancreatic cancer. Pancreas 24:15–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Piver MS, Rutledge F, Smith JP (1974) Five classes of extended hysterectomy for women with cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 44(2):265–272

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Peters WA III, Liu PY, Barrett RJ II, Stock RJ, Monk BJ, Berek JS et al (2000) 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 18(8):1606–1613

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sedlis A, Bundy BN, Rotman MZ, Lentz SS, Muderspach LI, Zaino RJ (1999) A randomized trial of pelvic radiation therapy versus no further therapy in selected patients with stage IB carcinoma of the cervix after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy: a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 73(2):177–183

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D et al (2000) Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 283:2008–2012

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analysis. www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp, Accessed 25 Nov 2012

  16. Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, Burdett S, Sydes MR (2007) Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis. Trials 11:16. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-8-16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Memarzadeh S, Natarajan S, Dandade DP, Ostrzega N, Saber PA, Busuttil A et al (2003) Lymphovascular andperineural invasion in the parametria: a prognostic factor for early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 102(3):612–619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. OzanH OzuysalS (2009) Ediz B. Perineural invasion in early-stage cervical carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 30(4):379–383

    Google Scholar 

  19. Meinel A, Fischer U, Bilek K, Hentschel B, Horn LC (2011) Morphological parameters associated with perineural invasion (PNI) in carcinoma of the cervix uteri. Int J Surg Pathol 19(2):159–163. doi:10.1177/1066896910381898 Epub 2010 Nov

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Horn LC, Meinel A, Fischer U, Bilek K, Hentschel B (2010) Perineural invasion in carcinoma of the cervix uteri—prognostic impact. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 136(10):1557–1562

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Elsahwi KS, Barber E, Illuzzi J, Buza N, Ratner E, Silasi DA (2011) The significance of perineural invasion in early-stage cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 123(3):561–564

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Cho HC, Kim H, Cho HY, Kim K, No JH, Kim YB (2013) Prognostic significance of perineural invasion in cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Pathol 32(2):228–233

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Su CH, Tsay SH, Wu CC, Shyr YM, King KL, Lee CH et al (1996) Factors influencing postoperative morbidity, mortality, and survival after resection forhilar cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg 223(4):384–394

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Beard CJ, Chen MH, Cote K, Loffredo M, Renshaw AA, Hurwitz M et al (2004) Perineural invasion is associated with increased relapse after external beam radiotherapy for men with low-risk prostate cancer and may be a marker for occult, high-grade cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol. Biol Phys 58(1):19–24

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Duraker N, Sisman S, Can G (2003) The significance of perineural invasion as a prognostic factor in patients with gastric carcinoma. Surg Today 33(2):95–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ozaki H, Hiraoka T, Mizumoto R, Matsuno S, Matsumoto Y, Nakayama T et al (1999) The prognostic significance of lymph node metastasis and intrapancreatic perineural invasion in pancreatic cancer after curative resection. Surg Today 29(1):16–22

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Law WL, Chu KW (2004) Anterior resection for rectal cancer with mesorectal excision: a prospective evaluation of 622 patients. Ann Surg 240(2):260–268

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Limawararut V, Leibovitch I, Sullivan T, Selva D (2007) Periocular squamous cell carcinoma. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 35(2):174–185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Piver MS, Rutledge F, Smith JP (1974) Five classes of extended hysterectomy for women with cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 44(2):265–272

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Peters WA III, Liu PY, Barrett RJ II, Stock RJ, Monk BJ, Berek JS et al (2000) 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 18(8):1606–1613

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Raspagliesi F, Ditto A, Kusamura S, Fontanelli R, Spatti G, Solima E et al (2003) Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: a pilot study. Tumori 89(5):497–501

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. MagrinaJ F, Pawlina W, Kho RM, Magtibay PM (2011) Robotic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: feasibility and technique. Gynecol Oncol 121(3):605–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Li B, Li W, Sun YC, Zhang R, Zhang GY, Yu GZ et al (2011) Nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy: a simplified technique of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for invasive cervical cancer. Chin Med J (Engl) 124(12):1807–1812

    Google Scholar 

  34. Skret A, Nowakowski B, Skret-Magierlo J, Baranowski W (2008) Nerve sparing radical hysterectomy. Ginekol Pol 79(2):92–98

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Raspagliesi F, Ditto A, Hanozet F, Martinelli F, Solima E, Zanaboni F et al (2007) Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer: evolution of concepts. Gynecol Oncol 107(Suppl 1):S119–S121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge Dr. Tan Chunlu, Department of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China, for consultation and inspiration.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical standard

Ethical approval is not required as this is a systematic review of published manuscripts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gynecological Oncology, Second People’s Hospital of Sichuan, Sichuan Cancer Hospital, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, People’s Republic of China

    Ling Cui, Yu Shi & Guo Nan Zhang

Authors
  1. Ling Cui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yu Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guo Nan Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guo Nan Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cui, L., Shi, Y. & Zhang, G.N. Perineural invasion as a prognostic factor for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 292, 13–19 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3627-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3627-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation