Advertisement

Uterine Sarcomas: Surgical Management, Adjuvant Therapy and Survival Outcome. Experience at Gujarat Cancer and Research Institute

  • Shilpa M. PatelEmail author
  • Rajnish Tiwari
  • Ruchi S. Arora
  • Pabashi Poddar
  • Ava Desai
  • Meeta H. Mankad
Original Article
  • 7 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Uterine sarcomas are rare, accounting for 7–8% of all uterine cancers and less than 1% of all female genital tract cancers. Surgery is a cornerstone in the treatment, and addition of radiotherapy, chemotherapy or hormonal therapy depends on the stage of the disease. Due to its rarity, heterogeneity and aggressiveness, there is no consensus and there is scarce evidence regarding the optimal therapeutic approaches.

Purpose

Our aim was to study the cases of uterine sarcoma in terms of clinical and histopathological characteristics, prognostic factors and outcome analysis.

Methods

This is a retrospective study of all cases of histological proven uterine sarcoma identified between January 2001 and December 2013 at the Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Gujarat Cancer and Research Institute, Ahmedabad. The data regarding the patients’ characteristics, tumor characteristics, various treatment modalities, operative details, follow-up, recurrence and survival were reviewed and recorded.

Results

Total 57 were included in our study. Leiomyosarcoma was the most common histopathological type. Twenty-four cases were stage 1 and were kept on observation. Almost 50% of the patients in our study recurred during our study period. Overall 64% of the patients survived till 3 years and 53% till 5 years of follow-up. Twenty-six percent of the case died within first year of completion of treatment.

Conclusion

The management of uterine sarcomas is challenging due to the rare occurrence, lack of consensus or guidelines and adequate literature. Adjuvant treatment should be individualized.

Keywords

Uterine sarcoma Leiomyosarcoma Endometrial stromal sarcoma Cytoreduction Hormonal therapy 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Kosary CL. Cancer of the corpus uteri. In: Ries LAG, Young JL, Keel GE, Eisner MP, Lin YD, Horner M-J (editors). SEER Survival Monograph: Cancer Survival Among Adults: U.S. SEER Program, 1988–2001, Patient and Tumor Characteristics. National Cancer Institute, SEER Program, NIH Pub. No. 07-6215, Bethesda, MD, 2007:123–132.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akahira J, Tokunaga H, Toyoshima M, Takano T, Nagase S, Yoshinaga K, Tase T, Wada Y, Ito K, Niikura H, Yamada H, Sato A, Sasano H, Yae-gashi N. Prognoses and prognostic factors of carcinosarcoma, endometrial stromal sarcoma and uterine leiomyosarcoma: a comparison with uterine endometrial adenocarcinoma. Oncology. 2006;71:333–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sharma DN, Rath GK, Kumar S, Kumar L, Bhatla N, Gandhi AK, Hariprasad R. Clinical outcome of patients with uterine sarcomas. J Cancer Res Ther. 2011;7:270–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Prat J. FIGO staging for uterine sarcomas. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009;104(3):177–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shah JP, Bryant CS, Kumar S, et al. Lymphadenectomy and ovarian preservation in low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112:1102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wright JD, Seshan VE, Shah M, et al. The role of radiation in improving survival for early-stage carcinosarcoma and leiomyosarcoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(5):536.e1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Puliyath G, Nair MK. Endometrial stromal sarcoma: a review of the literature. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol. 2012;33(1):1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hoellen F, Waldmann A, Benthin S, Hanker L, Rody A, Fischer D. The role of lymphadenectomy in uterine sarcoma: a clinical practical approach based on retrospective analysis. Anticancer Res. 2014;34:985–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barakat RR, Berchuck A, Markman M, Randall ME. Principles and practice of gynaecologic oncology. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Desara IME, Ottevanger PB, et al. Systemic treatment in adult uterine sarcomas. Crit Rev Oncol/Hematol. 2018;122:10–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Si M, Jia L, et al. Role of lymphadenectomy for uterine sarcoma—a meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2017;27:109–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Horng H-C, Wen K-C, et al. Uterine sarcoma-TheTAG systematic review. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;55:472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giuntoli RL 2nd, Metzinger DS, DiMarco CS, Cha SS, Sloan JA, Keeney GL, et al. Retrospective review of 2008 patients with Leiomyosarcoma of the uterus; prognostic indicators, surgical management and adjuvant therapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;89:460–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li AJ, Giuntoli RL 2nd, Drake R, Byun SY, Rojas F, Barbuto D, et al. Ovarian preservation in stage I low-grade endometrial stromal sarcomas. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106:1304–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    de León DC, González H, et al. Uterine sarcomas: review of 26 years at the Instituto Nacional deCancerologia of Mexico. Int J Surg. 2013;11:518–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hosh Mona, Antar Sarah, et al. Uterine sarcoma—analysis of 13,089 cases based on SEER database. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016;26:1098–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nassar OA, Abdul Moaty SB, Khalil el-SA, El-Taher MM, El Najjar M. Outcome and prognostic factors of uterine sarcoma in 59 patients: single institutional results. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2010;22:113–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    NaamanY ShveikyD, Ben-ShacharI ShushanA, Mejia-GomezJ Benshushan A. Uterine sarcoma: prognostic factors and treatment evaluation. IMAJ. 2011;13:76–9.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D’Angelo E, Prat J. Uterine sarcomas: a review. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;116(1):131–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Park JY, Kim DY, Suh DS, Kim JH, Kim YM, Kim YT. Prognostic factors and treatment outcomes of patients with uterine sarcomas: analysis of 127 patients at single institution, 1989-2007. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2008;134:1277–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sivakumari S, Rajaraman R, Subbiah S. Uterine sarcoma: the Indian Scenario. Indian J Surg Oncol. 2015;6(3):232–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gadducci A, Sartori E, Landoni F, Zola P, Maggino T, Urgesi A, et al. Endometrial stoma sarcoma: analysis in treatment failure and survival. Gynecol Oncol. 1996;63:247–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Morice P, Rodrigues A, Pautier P, Rey A, Camatte S, Atallah D. Surgery for uterine sarcoma: review of literature and recommendation for the standard surgical procedure. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2003;32:147–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Naaman Y, Shveiky D, Ben-Shachar I, et al. Uterine sarcoma: prognostic factors and treatment evaluation. IMAJ. 2011;13(2):76–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gadducci A, Cosio S, Romanaine A, Genazzani AR. The management of patients with uterine sarcoma: a debated clinical challenge. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2008;65:129–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rothmund R, Hartkopf A, Joachim C, Walter CB, Wallwiener M, Kraemer B, et al. Clinical characteristics, pathological reevaluation, surgical management and adjuvant therapy of patients with endometrial stromal tumors. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;290:1195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shi Y, Liu Z, Peng Z, Liu H, Yang K, Yao X. The diagnosis and treatment of Mullerian adenosarcoma of the uterus. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008;48:596–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tosol Y, Kim HJ. Outcome analysis in patients with uterine sarcoma. Radiat Oncol J. 2015;33(1):29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chauveinc L, Deniaud E, Plancher C, Saastre X, Amesani F, de La Rochefordiere A, et al. Uterine sarcomas: the Curie institute experiences. Prognosis factors and adjuvant treatment. Gynecol Oncl. 1999;72:232–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tropé CG, Abeler VM, Kristensen GB. Diagnosis and treatment of sarcoma of the uterus. A review. Acta Oncol. 2012;51:694–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brooks SE, Zhan M, Cote T, Baquet CR. Surveillance epidemiology and end results analysis of 2677 cases of uterine sarcoma 1989-1999. Gynecol Oncol. 2004;93:204–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mittal K, Sowslow R, McCluggage WG. Application of immunohistochemistry to gynecologic pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008;132:402–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hanley KZ, Birdsong GG, et al. Recent developments in surgical pathology of the uterine corpus. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2017;141:528–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Gynecologic Oncologists of India 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shilpa M. Patel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rajnish Tiwari
    • 1
  • Ruchi S. Arora
    • 1
  • Pabashi Poddar
    • 1
  • Ava Desai
    • 1
  • Meeta H. Mankad
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Gynecologic OncologyGujarat Cancer and Research InstituteAhmedabadIndia

Personalised recommendations