Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Defining prognostic factors in older patients with endometrial cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 02 July 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

Background

Endometrial cancer (EC) is most frequently seen in older and postmenopausal women.

Aim

The aim of this study was to evaluate the rate of recurrence and survival and clinical, pathological, surgical, and treatment factors affecting recurrence and survival in older patients with EC.

Methods

Three hundred and six (21.7%) patients aged ≥ 65 out of a total of 1413 patients diagnosed with and treated for epithelial EC at the Division of Gynecologic Oncology between January 1993 and May 2013 were evaluated retrospectively. All patients were staged according to FIGO 2009 staging system. Progression-free survival (PFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were determined. Independent prognostic factors affecting recurrence and survival were evaluated by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

The median age of the patients was 68 (65–92) years. Eighty-nine patients (29.1%) were diagnosed with stage III–IV disease. Tumor type was endometrioid in 226 (73.9%) patients, and 101 (33%) patients were diagnosed with FIGO grade 1 endometrioid endometrial cancer. One hundred fifty-three patients received adjuvant therapy after surgery. Five-year PFS, 5-year CSS, and 5-year OS were 73%, 85%, and 83%, respectively. Only the 2009 FIGO stage was independently associated with PFS (OR = 3.495, 95% CI 1.592–7.675; p = 0.002) and CSS (OR = 6.135, 95%CI 1.269–31.417; p = 0.024).

Conclusion

In conclusion, 2009 FIGO stage was found to be the only independent prognostic factor associated with recurrence and death in older patients with endometrial cancer.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Data and material is available.

Change history

References

  1. Applegate WB, Burns R (1996) Geriatric medicine. JAMA 275(23):1812–1813

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Türkiye Sağlık Bakanlığı, Halk Sağlığı Genel Müdürlüğü (2016) Yılı Türkiye Kanser İstatistikleri. https://hsgm.saglik.gov.tr/tr/kanser-istatistikleri. Accessed 29 November 2020

  3. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2020). World Population Ageing 2019 (ST/ESA/SER.A/444). https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/ageing/WorldPopulationAgeing2019-Report.pdf. Accessed 29 November 2020

  4. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM et al (2011) Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 61(2):69–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I et al (2018) Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68(6):394–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al SEER Cancer Statistics Review, (1975-2017), National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD. https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2017/. Accessed 29 November 2020

  7. Fleming ND, Lentz SE, Cass I et al (2011) Is older age a poor prognostic factor in stage I and II endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma? Gynecol Oncol 120(2):189–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Vance S, Yechieli R, Cogan C et al (2012) The prognostic significance of age in surgically staged patients with Type II endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 126(1):16–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Grune T, Jung T, Merker K et al (2004) Decreased proteolysis caused by protein aggregates, inclusion bodies, plaques, lipofuscin, ceroid, and ‘aggresomes’ during oxidative stress, aging, and disease. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 36(12):2519–2530

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Benito V, Lubrano A, Andujar M et al (2019) Management of endometrial cancer in patients aged 80 years and older: identifying patients who may benefit from a curative treatment. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 242:36–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wright JD, Lewin SN, Medel NIB et al (2011) Endometrial cancer in the oldest old: tumor characteristics, patterns of care, and outcome. Gynecol Oncol 122(1):69–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hahn HS, Lee IH, Kim TJ et al (2013) Lymphovascular space invasion is highly associated with lymph node metastasis and recurrence in endometrial cancer. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 53(3):293–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Kurman RJ et al (1991) Relationship between surgical-pathological risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endometrium: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 40(1):55–65

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Alektiar KM, Venkatraman E, Abu-Rustum N et al (2003) Is endometrial carcinoma intrinsically more aggressive in elderly patients? Cancer 98(11):2368–2377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Zaino RJ, Kurman RJ, Diana KL et al (1996) Pathologic models to predict outcome for women with endometrial adenocarcinoma: the importance of the distinction between surgical stage and clinical stage–A gynecologic oncology group study. Cancer 77(6):1115–1121

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Mahdi H, Lockhart D, Maurer KA (2015) Impact of age on 30-day mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing surgery for endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 137(1):106–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lachance JA, Everett EN, Greer B et al (2006) The effect of age on clinical/pathologic features, surgical morbidity, and outcome in patients with endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 101(3):470–475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wright JD, Lewin SN, Medel NIB et al (2011) Morbidity and mortality of surgery for endometrial cancer in the oldest old. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(1):66. e1-e8

  19. Reiser E, Potsch N, Seebacher V et al (2021) Impact of frailty on the management of patients with gynecological cancer aged 80 years and older. Arch Gynecol Obstet 303(2):557–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bourgin C, Saidani M, Poupon C et al (2016) Endometrial cancer in elderly women: which disease, which surgical management? A systematic review of the literature. Eur J Surg Oncol 42(2):166–175

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Etlik Zubeyde Hanim Women’s Health Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Etlik Street, 06010, Yenimahalle, Ankara, Turkey

    Ozge Yucel Celik, Mehmet Unsal, Fatih Kilic, Okan Aytekin, Caner Cakir, Gunsu Kimyon Comert, Osman Turkmen & Taner Turan

  2. Division of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

    Pelin Unsal

Authors
  1. Ozge Yucel Celik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehmet Unsal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fatih Kilic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pelin Unsal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Okan Aytekin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Caner Cakir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gunsu Kimyon Comert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Osman Turkmen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Taner Turan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

O.Y.C.: conceptualization, data curation, methodology, validation, writing the original draft, and review and editing. M.U.: review and editing. F.K., P.U., O.A. and C.C.: data curation, validation. G.K.C.: visualization, data curation, statistical analysis. O.T., and T.T.: supervision, methodology, validation, review, and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet Unsal.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

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. The study protocol has been approved by the research institute’s committee on human research.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for publication

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

The original online version of this article was revised: The original article contains an error. The value *p<0.005, given as the footnote of Table 5-6, be corrected as *p<0.05.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yucel Celik, O., Unsal, M., Kilic, F. et al. Defining prognostic factors in older patients with endometrial cancer. Ir J Med Sci 191, 1123–1131 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-021-02663-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-021-02663-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation