Skip to main content
Log in

Observational multicenter Italian study on vulvar cancer adjuvant radiotherapy (OLDLADY 1.2): a cooperation among AIRO Gyn, MITO and MaNGO groups

  • Radiotherapy
  • Published:
La radiologia medica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) has been shown to reduce the risk of local relapse in vulvar cancer (VC). In this multicentre study (OLDLADY-1.2), several Institutions have combined their retrospective data on VC patients to produce a real-world dataset aimed at collecting data on efficacy and safety of aRT.

Methods

The primary study end-point was the 2-year-local control, secondary end-points were the 2-year-metastasis free-survival, the 2-year-overall survival and the rate and severity of acute and late toxicities. Participating centres were required to fill data sets including age, stage, tumor diameter, type of surgery, margin status, depth of invasion, histology, grading as well technical/dosimetric details of radiotherapy. Data about response, local and regional recurrence, acute and late toxicities, follow-up and outcome measures were also collected.

Results

One hundred eighty-one patients with invasive VC from 9 Institutions were retrospectively identified. The majority of patients were stage III (63%), grade 2 (62.4%) squamous carcinoma (97.2%). Positive nodes were observed in 117 patients (64.6%), moreover tumor diameter > 4 cm, positive/close margins and depth of invasion deeper than 5 mm were found in 59.1%, 38.6%, 58% of patients, respectively. Sixty-one patients (33.7%) received adjuvant chemoradiation, and 120 (66.3%) received radiotherapy alone. aRT was started 3 months after surgery in 50.8% of patients. Prescribed volumes and doses heterogeneity was recorded according to margin status and nodal disease. Overall, 42.5% locoregional recurrences were recorded. With a median follow-up of 27 months (range 1–179), the 2-year actuarial local control rate, metastasis free and overall survival were 68.7%, 84.5%, and 67.5%, respectively. In term of safety, aRT leads to a prevalence of acute skin toxicity with a low incidence of severe toxicities.

Conclusions

In the context of aRT for VC the present study reports a broad spectrum of approaches which would deserve greater standardization in terms of doses, volumes and drugs used.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2015) Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin 65:5–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Eifel PJ, Berek JS, Markman MA (2011) Cancer of the cervix, vagina, and vulva. In: DeVita VT Jr, Lawrence TS, Rosenberg SA (eds) DeVita, Hellman, and Rosenberg’s cancer: principles and practices of oncology. Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  3. Morley GW (1976) Infiltrative carcinoma of the vulva: results of surgical treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 124:874–888. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(16)33392-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Podratz KC, Symmonds RE, Taylor WF et al (1983) Carcinoma of the vulva: analysis of treatment and survival. Obstet Gynecol 61:63–74

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Andersen BL, Hacker NF (1983) Psychosexual adjustment after vulvar surgery. Obst Gynecol 62:457–462

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Te Grootenhuis NC, van der Zee AG, 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 140:8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.09.077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 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 38:309–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-8258(90)90064-r

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tagliaferri L, Garganese G, D’Aviero A et al (2020) Multidisciplinary personalized approach in the management of vulvar cancer - the Vul. Can Team experience. Int J Gynecol Cancer 30:932–938. https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-001465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tagliaferri L, Lancellotta V, Casà C et al (2021) The radiotherapy role in the multidisciplinary management of locally advanced vulvar cancer: a multidisciplinary vulcan team review. Cancers (Basel) 13:5747. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13225747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Homesley HD, Bundy BN, Sedlis A et al (1991) Assessment of current international federation of gynecology and obstetrics staging of vulvar carcinoma relative to prognostic factors for survival (a Gynecologic Oncology Group study). Am J Obstet Gynecol 164:997–1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(91)90573-a

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Federico F, Forte S, Ardighieri L et al (2019) Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in primary squamous cell vulvar cancer: the role of perineural invasion in recurrence and survival. Eur J Surg Oncol 45:2115–2119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2019.07.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Miljanović-Špika I, Drežnjak Madunić M, Topolovec Z et al (2021) Prognostic factors for vulvar cancer. Acta Clin Croat 60:25–32. https://doi.org/10.20471/acc.2021.60.01.04

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Chapman BV, Gill BS, Viswanathan AN et al (2017) Adjuvant radiation therapy for margin-positive vulvar squamous cell carcinoma: defining the ideal dose-response using the National Cancer Database. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 97:107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.09.023

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kunos C, Simpkins F, Gibbons H et al (2009) Radiation therapy compared with pelvic node resection for node-positive vulvar cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 114:537–546. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b12f99

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Swanick CW, Eifel PJ, Huo J et al (2017) Challenges to delivery and effectiveness of adjuvant radiation therapy in elderly patients with node-positive vulvar cancer. Gynecol Oncol 146:87–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.05.004

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Parthasarathy A, Cheung MK, Osann K et al (2006) The benefit of adjuvant radiation therapy in single-node-positive squamous cell vulvar carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 103:1095–1099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.06.030

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mahner S, Jueckstock J, Hilpert F et al (2015) AGO-CaRE-1 Investigators. Adjuvant therapy in lymph node-positive vulvar cancer: the AGO-CaRE-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst 107:426. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju426

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gill BS, Bernard ME, Lin JF et al (2015) Impact of adjuvant chemotherapy with radiation for node-positive vulvar cancer: a National Cancer Database (NCDB) analysis. Gynecol Oncol 137:365–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.03.056

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ignatov T, Eggemann H, Burger E et al (2016) Adjuvant radiotherapy for vulvar cancer with close or positive surgical margins. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 142:489–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-015-2060-9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gaffney DK, King B, Viswanathan AN et al (2016) Consensus recommendations for radiation therapy contouring and treatment of vulvar carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 95:1191–1200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.02.043

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Grégoire V, Guckenberger M, Haustermans K et al (2020) Image guidance in radiation therapy for better cure of cancer. Mol Oncol 14:1470–1491. https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.12751

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Moore DH, Thomas GM, Montana GS et al (1998) Preoperative chemoradiation for advanced vulvar cancer: a phase II study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 42:79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-3016(98)00193-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Aragona AM, Cuneo NA, Soderini AH et al (2014) An analysis of reported independent prognostic factors for survival in squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva: Is tumor size significance being underrated? Gynecol Oncol 132:643–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.12.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Greer BE, Koh WJ (2016) New NCCN guidelines for vulvar cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 14:656–658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Dudley S, Viswanathan A (2019) Margins in vulvar cancer: challenges to classical clinicopathologic vulvar recurrence risk factors. Gynecol Oncol 154:253–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.07.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Te Grootenhuis NC, Pouwer AW, de Bock GH et al (2019) Margin status revisited in vulvar squamous cell carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 154:266–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.05.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 5. Published: November 27. US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute

  28. Micheletti L, Preti M, Zola P et al (1998) A proposed glossary of terminology related to the surgical treatment of vulvar carcinoma. Cancer 83:1369–1375

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Jolly S, Soni P, Gaffney DK et al (2015) ACR appropriateness criteria adjuvant therapy in vulvar cancer. Oncology 29:867–875

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Khullar K, Patrich T, Jabbour SK, Hathout L (2022) Adjuvant radiation in early stage vulvar cancer: a review of indications and optimal dose. Appl Radiat Oncol 11:14–20

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Mahantshetty U, Naga P, Engineer R et al (2017) Clinical outcome of high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy in vulvar cancer: a single institutional experience. Brachytherapy 16:153–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Han SC, Kim DH, Higgins SA, Carcangiu ML, Kacinski BM (2000) Chemoradiation as primary or adjuvant treatment for locally advanced carcinoma of the vulva. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 47:1235–1244

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Zapardiel I, Iacoponi S, Coronado PJ et al (2020) Prognostic factors in patients with vulvar cancer: the VULCAN study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 30:1285–1291. https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2019-000526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gill BS, Bernard ME, Lin JF et al (2015) Impact of adjuvant chemotherapy with radiation for node-positive vulvar cancer: a National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) analysis. Gynecol Oncol 137:365–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lee CW, Dupré S, Marlborough F et al (2022) Postoperative radiotherapy delay in head and neck cancer patients undergoing major resection and free flap reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2022.02.038

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Burger MP, Hollema H, Emanuels AG et al (1995) The importance of the groin node status for the survival of T1 and T2 vulval carcinoma patients. Gynecol Oncol 57:327–334. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.1995.1151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Raspagliesi F, Hanozet F, Ditto A et al (2006) Clinical and pathological prognostic factors in squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva. Gynecol Oncol 102:333–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.12.027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Rhodes CA, Cummins C, Shafi MI (1998) The management of squamous cell vulval cancer: a population based retrospective study of 411 cases. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 105:200–205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1998.tb10053.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sun X, Zhang Y, Sun J, Feng S, Yan M, Cheng H (2012) The comparative study of former and latest FIGO staging of vulvar cancer. Minerva Chir 67:187–195

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Tagliaferri L, Budrukkar A, Lenkowicz J et al (2018) ENT COBRA ONTOLOGY: the covariates classification system proposed by the Head & Neck and Skin GEC-ESTRO Working Group for interdisciplinary standardized data collection in head and neck patient cohorts treated with interventional radiotherapy (brachytherapy). J Contemp Brachyther 10:260–266. https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2018.76982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Tagliaferri L, Gobitti C, Colloca GF et al (2018) A new standardized data collection system for interdisciplinary thyroid cancer management: thyroid COBRA. Eur J Intern Med 53:73–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2018.02.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tagliaferri L, Pagliara MM, Masciocchi C et al (2017) Nomogram for predicting radiation maculopathy in patients treated with Ruthenium-106 plaque brachytherapy for uveal melanoma. J Contemp Brachyther 9:540–547. https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2017.71795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Meldolesi E, van Soest J, Alitto AR et al (2014) VATE: VAlidation of high TEchnology based on large database analysis by learning machine. Colorectal Cancer 5:435–450. https://doi.org/10.2217/crc.14.34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lancellotta V, Guinot JL, Fionda B et al (2020) SKIN-COBRA (Consortium for Brachytherapy data Analysis) ontology: the first step towards interdisciplinary standardized data collection for personalized oncology in skin cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy 12:105–110. https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2020.94579

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Authors thank the Scientific Committee and Board of the AIRO for the critical revision and final approval of the paper.

Funding

The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valentina Lancellotta.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Human and animal rights

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was waived by the local Ethics Committee of University A. Gemelli in view of the retrospective nature of the study and all the procedures being performed were part of the routine care.

Consent informed

Consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Macchia, G., Casà, C., Ferioli, M. et al. Observational multicenter Italian study on vulvar cancer adjuvant radiotherapy (OLDLADY 1.2): a cooperation among AIRO Gyn, MITO and MaNGO groups. Radiol med 127, 1292–1302 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01538-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01538-w

Keywords

Navigation