Journal of Radiation Oncology

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 207–213 | Cite as

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

Original Research
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
  • 44 Downloads

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.

Keywords

Endometrial cancer Radiation Brachytherapy 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

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.

References

  1. 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. 2.
    CDC - Uterine cancer rates by race and ethnicity. http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/uterine/statistics/race.htm. Accessed 7 Dec 2016
  3. 3.
    Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Homesley HD, Graham JE, Heller PB Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancerGoogle Scholar
  4. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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, 2016PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mutch D (2009) The new FIGO staging system for cancers of the vulva, cervix, endometrium, and sarcomas. Gynecol Oncol 115:325–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 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, 2016CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 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, 2016CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 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. 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, 2016CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 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, 2016PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 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 CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 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. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 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 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiation Oncology, Weill Cornell Medical CollegeNew York Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist HospitalBrooklynUSA

Personalised recommendations