Advertisement

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 298, Issue 5, pp 945–950 | Cite as

Impact of re-excision of residual adjacent vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN III) and histological tumour-free margin (hTFM) on survival in primary squamous cell carcinoma of vulva

  • Khayal Gasimli
  • Martina Straussner
  • Iryna Schmeil
  • Thomas Karn
  • Ria Winkelmann
  • Sven Becker
  • Ahmed El-Balat
Gynecologic Oncology

Abstract

Background

hTFM in primary vulvar cancer is an important prognostic factor. Ideally, a diameter of > 8 mm should be achieved after primary surgery. The role of VIN III persistence after primary surgery in vulvar cancer is still unclear. The main objective of the current study was to study the role of residual VIN III re-excision and compare differences in disease-free survival among patients with different hTFM and in primary vulvar cancer.

Methods

Forty-two patients with residual adjacent VIN III after primary surgery for vulvar cancer which were operated between 2000 and 2016 in our clinic were enrolled in this retrospective study. Re-excision rates for residual adjacent VIN III were calculated. According to the histological margin patients were divided into three group: < 3, 3–8 and > 8 mm. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models, respectively.

Results

The vast majority of patients had pT1b stage (57.1%), grading G2 (71.4%) and lymph node-negative (45.3%) disease at first diagnosis. The re-excision rate was 57.1%. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates in patients with < 3, 3–8 and > 8 mm hTFM were 50.0, 50.0 and 81.0%, respectively (p = 0.032). The 5-year DFS rates in patients with re-excision and without re-excision for VIN III were 77.3 and 52.9%, respectively (p = 0.060). In univariate analysis was solely hTFM > 8 mm a prognostic factor for DFS (p = 0.017).

Conclusions

hTFM may be a potential prognostic indicator for DFS in vulvar cancer patients. Re-excision for residual adjacent VIN III could not be established as a prognostic factor for DFS after primary surgery in squamous cell cancer of vulva.

Keywords

Squamous cell carcinoma of vulva Re-excision of adjacent VIN III Histological tumour-free margin Vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN III) Disease-free survival 

Notes

Author contributions

KG: data collection and management, data analysis, statistical analysis (descriptive), manuscript writing and editing; MS: data collection and management, data analysis; IS: data collection; RW: histological examination; TK: data analysis, statistical analysis (correlation, survival); SB: project development; AE-B: protocol and project development, manuscript correction.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

No financial or personal conflict of interest by any of the authors to declare.

References

  1. 1.
    Hampl M, Deckers-Figiel S, Hampl JA et al (2008) New aspects of vulvar cancer: changes in localization and age of onset. Gynecol Oncol 109(3):340–345CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Ghamdi A, Freedman D, Miller D et al (2002) Vulvar squamous cell carcinoma in young women: a clinicopathologic study of 21 cases. Gynecol Oncol 84(1):94–101CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van Seters M, van Beurden M, de Craen AJM (2005) Is the assumed natural history of vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia III based on enough evidence? A systematic review of 3322 published patients. Gynecol Oncol 97(2):645–651CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reyes MC, Cooper K (2014) An update on vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia: terminology and a practical approach to diagnosis. J Clin Pathol 67(4):290–294CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Vuyst H, Clifford GM, Nascimento MC et al (2009) Prevalence and type distribution of human papillomavirus in carcinoma and intraepithelial neoplasia of the vulva, vagina and anus: a meta-analysis. Int J Cancer 124(7):1626–1636CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Insinga RP, Liaw K-L, Johnson LG et al (2008) A systematic review of the prevalence and attribution of human papillomavirus types among cervical, vaginal, and vulvar precancers and cancers in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev Publ Am Assoc Cancer Res Cosponsored Am Soc Prev Oncol 17(7):1611–1622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Helm CW, Hatch K, Austin JM et al (1992) A matched comparison of single and triple incision techniques for the surgical treatment of carcinoma of the vulva. Gynecol Oncol 46(2):150–156CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Raimond E, Pelissier A, Etienette Emeriau M et al (2017) Use of negative pressure wound therapy after vulvar carcinoma: case studies. J Wound Care 26(2):72–74CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Likes WM, Stegbauer C, Tillmanns T et al (2007) Correlates of sexual function following vulvar excision. Gynecol Oncol 105(3):600–603CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grimm D, Eulenburg C, Brummer O et al (2016) Sexual activity and function after surgical treatment in patients with (pre)invasive vulvar lesions. Support Care Cancer 24(1):419–428CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heaps JM, Fu YS, Montz FJ et al (1990) Surgical-pathologic variables predictive of local recurrence in squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva. Gynecol Oncol 38(3):309–314CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chan JK, Sugiyama V, Pham H et al (2007) Margin distance and other clinico-pathologic prognostic factors in vulvar carcinoma: a multivariate analysis. Gynecol Oncol 104(3):636–641CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Woelber L, Griebel L-F, Eulenburg C et al (1990) Role of tumour-free margin distance for loco-regional control in vulvar cancer—a subset analysis of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie CaRE-1 multicenter study. Eur J Cancer Oxf Engl 2016(69):180–188Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Baiocchi G, Mantoan H, de Brot L et al (2015) How important is the pathological margin distance in vulvar cancer? Eur J Surg Oncol 41(12):1653–1658CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Woolderink JM, de Bock GH, de Hullu JA et al (2006) Patterns and frequency of recurrences of squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva. Gynecol Oncol 103(1):293–299CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Preti M, Ronco G, Ghiringhello B et al (2000) Recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva: clinicopathologic determinants identifying low risk patients. Cancer 88(8):1869–1876CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sobin L, Gospodarowicz M, Wittekind C (2011) TNM classification of malignant tumours, 7th edn. Wiley-Blackwell, PAGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Oonk MHM, Planchamp F, Baldwin P et al (2017) European society of gynaecological oncology guidelines for the management of patients with vulvar cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 27(4):832–837CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Woelber L, Kock L, Gieseking F et al (2011) Clinical management of primary vulvar cancer. Eur J Cancer 47(15):2315–2321CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nooij LS, van der Slot MA, Dekkers OM et al (1990) Tumour-free margins in vulvar squamous cell carcinoma: does distance really matter? Eur J Cancer Oxf Engl 2016(65):139–149Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dittmer C, Fischer D, Diedrich K et al (2012) Diagnosis and treatment options of vulvar cancer: a review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 285(1):183–193CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Del Pino M, Rodriguez-Carunchio L, Ordi J (2013) Pathways of vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia and squamous cell carcinoma. Histopathology 62(1):161–175CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sideri M, Jones RW, Wilkinson EJ et al (2005) Squamous vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia: 2004 modified terminology, ISSVD vulvar oncology subcommittee. J Reprod Med 50(11):807–810PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Edwards CL, Tortolero-Luna G, Linares AC et al (1996) Vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia and vulvar cancer. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 23(2):295–324PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Groenen SMA, Timmers PJ, Burger CW (2010) Recurrence rate in vulvar carcinoma in relation to pathological margin distance. Int J Gynecol Cancer 20(5):869–873CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Modesitt SC, Waters AB, Walton L et al (1998) Vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia III: occult cancer and the impact of margin status on recurrence. Obstet Gynecol 92(6):962–966PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stehman FB, Bundy BN, Ball H et al (1996) Sites of failure and times to failure in carcinoma of the vulva treated conservatively: a gynecologic oncology group study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 174(4):1128–1132 (discussion 1132–1133) CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Te Grootenhuis NC, van der Zee AGJ, van Doorn HC et al (2016) Sentinel nodes in vulvar cancer: long-term follow-up of the GROningen INternational Study on Sentinel nodes in Vulvar cancer (GROINSS-V) I. Gynecol Oncol 140(1):8–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyGoethe University FrankfurtFrankfurtGermany
  2. 2.Dr. Senckenberg Institute of PathologyFrankfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations