Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Adjuvant chemotherapy versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy for high-risk cervical cancer after radical hysterectomy and systematic lymphadenectomy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of chemotherapy (CT) compared with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) after radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy in high-risk patients with early-stage cervical cancer and to evaluate whether the radicality of the lymphadenectomy would affect the outcome and toxicity of postoperative adjuvant therapy.

Methods

The cases of all patients (n = 393) with FIGO IB1–IIB cervical cancer who were treated by radical surgery at Shizuoka Cancer Center between January 2002 and December 2013 were reviewed. Of these, 111 patients met the inclusion criteria for this retrospective study: (1) high risk for occurrence due to pathologically confirmed parametrial invasion and/or pelvic lymph node metastasis; (2) postoperative treatment with adjuvant CT or CCRT. The clinical data of these patients were reviewed.

Results

Of the 111 patients, 37 and 74 patients underwent CT and CCRT, respectively. The 4-year progression-free survival rate [PFS; 71.7 (CT) vs. 68.3 % (CCRT)] and overall survival rate [76.0 (CT) vs. 82.7 % (CCRT)] did not differ significantly between the two groups. The CT group contained significantly more patients with severe neutropenia than the CCRT group (66.7 vs. 23.0 %, respectively; p < 0.001), and the CCRT group contained significantly more patients with diarrhea than the CT group (10.8 vs. 0 %, respectively; p = 0.04). The patients who had ≥40 lymph nodes dissected (≥40 group) had higher PFS than the patients who had <40 lymph nodes dissected (<40 group) (73.2 vs. 64.2 %, respectively), although the difference was not significant. In the CT group, there was no significant association between the number of dissected lymph nodes and severe toxicities. However, in the CCRT group, significantly more vomiting (p = 0.046) and edema (p = 0.046) occurred in the ≥40 group than in the <40 group.

Conclusions

Chemotherapy after surgery for high-risk patients had similar efficacy and a different toxicity profile compared with CCRT, and a more radical surgical procedure would improve the survival outcome. However, CCRT was associated with worse toxicity than CT. We advocate a prospective randomized study to compare CT with CCRT for patients with high-risk factors for recurrence.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Benedet JL, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P et al (2001) Carcinoma of the cervix uteri. J Epidemiol Biostat 6:7–43

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (ed) (2011) Treatment guidelines for cervical cancer. Kanehara & Co, Tokyo

  3. Takekuma M, Kasamatsu Y, Kado N et al (2015) Reconsideration of postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy with fluorouracil and cisplatin for uterine cervical cancer. J Obstet Gynecol Res 41:1638–1643

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Lahousen M, Haas J, Pickel H et al (1999) Chemotherapy versus radiotherapy versus observation for high-risk cervical carcinoma after radical hysterectomy: a randomized prospective, multicenter trial. Gynecol Oncol 73:196–201

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Takeshima N, Umayahara K, Fujiwara K et al (2006) Treatment results of adjuvant chemotherapy after radical hysterectomy for intermediate- and high-risk stage IB-IIA cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 103:618–622

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hosaka M, Watari H, Kato T et al (2012) Clinical efficacy of paclitaxel/cisplatin as an adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy and systemic lymphadenectomy. J Surg Oncol 105:612–616

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Iwasaka T, Kamura T, Yokoyama M et al (1988) Adjuvant chemotherapy after radical hysterectomy for cervical carcinoma: a comparison with effects of radiotherapy. Obstet Gynecol 91:977–981

    Google Scholar 

  8. Takeshima N, Utsugi K, Hasumi K et al (2009) Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive cervical adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 19:277–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hosaka M, Watari H, Takeda M et al (2008) Treatment of cervical cancer with adjuvant chemotherapy versus adjuvant radiotherapy after radical hysterectomy and systemic lymphadenectomy. J Obstet Gynecol Rev 34:552–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Okabayashi H (1921) Radical abdominal hysterectomy for cancer of the cervix uteri: modification of the Takayama operation. Surg Gynecol Obstet 33:335–343

    Google Scholar 

  11. Peters WA 3rd, Liu PY, Barrett RJ 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 18:1606–1613

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rose PG, Bundy BN, Watkins EB et al (1999) Concurrent cisplatin-based radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 340:1144–1153

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Morris M, Eiffel PJ, Lu J et al (1999) Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high risk cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 340:1137–1143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Whitney CW, Sause W, Bundy DN et al (1999) Randomized comparison of fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus hydroxyurea as an adjunct to radiation therapy in stage IIB-IVA carcinoma of the cervix with negative para-aortic lymph nodes: a Gynecologic Oncology Group and Southwest Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 17:1339–1348

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Keys HM, Bundy BN, Stehman FB et al (1999) Cisplatin, radiation, and adjuvant hysterectomy compared with radiation and adjuvant hysterectomy for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma. N Engl J Med 340:1154–1161

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pieterse QD, Kenter GG, Gaarenstroom KN et al (2007) The number of pelvic lymph nodes in the quality control and prognosis of radical hysterectomy for the treatment of cervical cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 33:216–221

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lutman CV, Havrilesky LJ, Cragun JM et al (2006) Pelvic lymph node count is an important prognostic variable for FIGO stage I and II endometrial carcinoma with high-risk histology. Gynecol Oncol 102:92–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Division of Gynecology, Shizuoka Cancer Center, 1007 Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumicho, Suntogun, Shizuoka, 411-8777, Japan

    Munetaka Takekuma, Yuka Kasamatsu, Nobuhiro Kado, Shiho Kuji, Aki Tanaka, Nobutaka Takahashi, Masakazu Abe & Yasuyuki Hirashima

Authors
  1. Munetaka Takekuma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yuka Kasamatsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nobuhiro Kado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shiho Kuji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aki Tanaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nobutaka Takahashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Masakazu Abe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yasuyuki Hirashima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Munetaka Takekuma.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Takekuma, M., Kasamatsu, Y., Kado, N. et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy for high-risk cervical cancer after radical hysterectomy and systematic lymphadenectomy. Int J Clin Oncol 21, 741–747 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-016-0955-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-016-0955-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation