Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Current practices in the management of stage IB, grade 3 endometrial cancer in the United States

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Radiation Oncology

Abstract

Objectives

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy in the United States (US). Most patients are diagnosed with early stage disease and those with stage IB, grade 3 disease have inferior outcomes. Due to the heterogeneity among these patients, existing data has failed to yield cohesive recommendations to guide management decisions. The present study sought to analyze current practices regarding the use of adjuvant radiation for these patients.

Methods

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program was used to find all cases of endometrial cancer diagnosed between 2009 and 2013 in patients aged 18 or older. Data regarding the age (<60 versus ≥60), race (white versus non-white), tumor size (less than or equal to 4 cm versus >4 cm), type of surgery performed (less than the total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophrectomy, TH/BSO, versus greater than or equal to TH/BSO), number of nodes examined (<10 versus ≥10), radiation sequence with surgery (none versus adjuvant radiation), and type of radiation (brachytherapy versus external beam radiation versus both) was extracted from the database. We compared type of treatment administered based on the presence of risk factors. We also analyzed survival outcomes based on these clinic-pathologic factors.

Results

There were no differences between patients receiving surgery alone versus adjuvant radiation based on any parameter. Among those who received radiation, we found no differences between the type of radiation administered, except with respect to tumor size. Patients with small tumors (<4 cm) were more likely to be offered VBT alone (p = 0.03). The overall survival (OS) estimate for the group as a whole was 89% at 59 months. The OS for VBT alone and EBRT alone was 89%, while for the combination, it was 91%. Large tumor size and sub-optimal surgery were associated with inferior survival.

Conclusion

The current study highlights the fact that there is tremendous variation in the management of patients with stage IB, grade 3 endometrial cancer. Forty percent of patients in the US are not offered adjuvant radiation, despite inferior outcomes among these patients when treated with surgery alone. Clearly defined, uniform guidelines are needed to standardize management decisions for this group of patients. Uniform practice is especially important to cut costs in medicine and standardize treatment across health networks.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/corp.html (Accessed 06 Dec 2016). https://www.uptodate.com/contents/overview-of-endometrial-carcinoma/abstract/3

  2. CDC - Uterine cancer rates by race and ethnicity. http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/uterine/statistics/race.htm. Accessed 7 Dec 2016

  3. Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Homesley HD, Graham JE, Heller PB Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer

  4. Creutzberg CL, Nout RA, Lybeert MLM et al (2011) Fifteen-year radiotherapy outcomes of the randomized PORTEC-1 trial for endometrial carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol 81(4):e631–e638. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.04.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Nout R, Smit V, Putter H et al (2010) Vaginal brachytherapy versus pelvic external beam radiotherapy for patients with endometrial cancer of high-intermediate risk (PORTEC-2): an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Lancet 375(9717):816–823. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)62163-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. ASTEC/EN.5 Study Group, Blake P, Swart AM et al (2009) Adjuvant external beam radiotherapy in the treatment of endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC and NCIC CTG EN.5 randomised trials): pooled trial results, systematic review, and meta-analysis. Lancet 373(9658):137–146. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61767-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Aalders J, Abeler V, Kolstad P, Onsrud M (1980) Postoperative external irradiation and prognostic parameters in stage I endometrial carcinoma: clinical and histopathologic study of 540 patients. Obstet Gynecol 56(4):419–427 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6999399. Accessed December 7, 2016

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Keys HM, Roberts JA, Brunetto VL et al (2004) A phase III trial of surgery with or without adjunctive external pelvic radiation therapy in intermediate risk endometrial adenocarcinoma: a gynecologic Oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 92(3):744–751. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2003.11.048

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mutch D (2009) The new FIGO staging system for cancers of the vulva, cervix, endometrium, and sarcomas. Gynecol Oncol 115:325–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Straughn JM, Huh WK, Kelly FJ et al (2002) Conservative management of stage I endometrial carcinoma after surgical staging. Gynecol Oncol 84(2):194–200. doi:10.1006/gyno.2001.6494

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Orr JW, Holimon JL, Orr PF (1997) Stage I corpus cancer: is teletherapy necessary? Am J Obstet Gynecol 176(4):777–88-9 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9125601. Accessed December 8, 2016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bosse T, Peters EEM, Creutzberg CL et al (2015) Substantial lymph-vascular space invasion (LVSI) is a significant risk factor for recurrence in endometrial cancer – a pooled analysis of PORTEC 1 and 2 trials. Eur J Cancer 51(13):1742–1750. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2015.05.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schink JC, Rademaker AW, Miller DS, Lurain JR (1991) Tumor size in endometrial cancer. Cancer 67(11):2791–2794 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2025843. Accessed December 8, 2016

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Klopp A, Smith BD, Alektiar K et al (2014) The role of postoperative radiation therapy for endometrial cancer: executive summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology evidence-based guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 4(3):137–144. doi:10.1016/j.prro.2014.01.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Colombo N, Creutzberg C, Amant F et al (2016) ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO consensus conference on endometrial cancer: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 27(1):16–41. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdv484

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Creutzberg CL, van Putten WLJ, Wárlám-Rodenhuis CC et al (2004) Outcome of high-risk stage IC, grade 3, compared with stage I endometrial carcinoma patients: the postoperative radiation therapy in endometrial carcinoma trial. J Clin Oncol 22(7):1234–1241. doi:10.1200/JCO.2004.08.159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. de Boer SM, Powell ME, Mileshkin L et al (2016) Toxicity and quality of life after adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for women with high-risk endometrial cancer (PORTEC-3): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 17(8):1114–1126. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30120-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kosary CL FIGO stage, histology, histologic grade, age and race as prognostic factors in determining survival for cancers of the female gynecological system: an analysis of 1973-87 SEER cases of cancers of the endometrium, cervix, ovary, vulva, and vagina. Semin Surg Oncol 10(1):31–46 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8115784. Accessed December 8, 2016

  19. Clifford SL, Kaminetsky CP, Cirisano FD et al (1997) Racial disparity in overexpression of the p53 tumor suppressor gene in stage I endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 176(6):S229–S232 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9215213. Accessed December 8, 2016

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang L, Yorke E, Desobry G, Chui C-S (2002) Dosimetric advantage of using 6 MV over 15 MV photons in conformal therapy of lung cancer: Monte Carlo studies in patient geometries. J Appl Clin Med Phys 3(1):51–59. doi:10.1120/1.1432862

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Connell PP, Rotmensch J, Waggoner SE, Mundt AJ (1999) Race and clinical outcome in endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 94(5 Pt 1):713–720 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10546716. Accessed December 8, 2016

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 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(2):147–150. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6600698

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Mariani A, Webb MJ, Keeney GL, Lesnick TG, Podratz KC (2002) Surgical stage I endometrial cancer: predictors of distant failure and death. Gynecol Oncol 87(3):274–280. doi:10.1006/gyno.2002.6836

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Harkenrider MM, Adams W, Block AM, Kliethermes S, Small W, Grover S (2016) Improved overall survival with adjuvant radiotherapy for high-intermediate and high risk stage I endometrial cancer. Radiother Oncol. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2016.12.003

  25. Rydzewski NR, Strohl AE, Donnelly ED et al (2016) Receipt of vaginal brachytherapy is associated with improved survival in women with stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterus: a National Cancer Data Base study. Cancer 122(23):3724–3731. doi:10.1002/cncr.30228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chino JP, Jones E, Berchuck A, Secord AA, Havrilesky LJ (2012) The influence of radiation modality and lymph node dissection on survival in early-stage endometrial cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(5):1872–1879. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.03.054

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital, 506 Sixth Street, Brooklyn, NY, 11215, USA

    Leila Tchelebi, Adel Guirguis & Hani Ashamalla

Authors
  1. Leila Tchelebi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adel Guirguis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hani Ashamalla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leila Tchelebi.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This work did not receive funding.

Conflict of interest

Leila Tchelebi declares that she has no conflict of interest. Adel Guirguis declares that he has no conflict of interest. Hani Ashamalla declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tchelebi, L., Guirguis, A. & Ashamalla, H. Current practices in the management of stage IB, grade 3 endometrial cancer in the United States. J Radiat Oncol 6, 207–213 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13566-017-0314-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13566-017-0314-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation