Skip to main content

Surgical management of gynecologic rhabdomyosarcoma

Current Treatment Options in Oncology volume 5, pages 109–118 (2004)Cite this article

Opinion statement

The multidisciplinary treatment strategy for rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) of the female gynecologic system is evidence of the progress made in the management of many childhood cancers. Previously, initial radical surgery (eg, complete vaginectomy, hysterectomy, and pelvic exenteration) and less effective single-agent chemotherapeutic agents were used with suboptimal results. Over the past 30 years, there has been an increase in overall survival with gynecologic RMS and a significant decrease in the hysterectomy and vaginectomy rates. The usual recommended treatment strategy for gynecologic RMS is initial biopsy to establish the diagnosis, followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The specific chemotherapy regimen is selected based on the risk stratification of the particular patient, and this will often allow a more conservative surgical approach to be used, with the goal of complete tumor resection. Radiation therapy is considered before definitive surgical resection with minimal response to chemotherapy or after definitive surgical resection with positive margins. Recurrent or persistent RMS, including RMS of the female gynecologic system, represents a very aggressive disease with poor outcome. In these cases, aggressive management, including experimental chemotherapy agents and organ-sacrificing surgery, is often indicated to afford any chance of long-term survival. Continued enrollment of a high proportion of these patients into ongoing prospective clinical trials should allow the outcomes to continue to improve.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Crist WM, Anderson JR, Meza JL, et al.: Intergroup rhabdomyosarcoma study IV: results for patients with nonmetastatic disease. J Clin Oncol 2001, 19:3091–3102. A randomized trial of 883 patients entered in the IRS-IV study. Although this large trial does not focus on gynecologic RMS, the authors show that VAC (with or without RT) remains the gold standard. It is the first IRSG study to prospectively use the grouping and staging classification schemes together to determine therapy.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Arndt CA, Donaldson SS, Anderson JR, et al.: What constitutes optimal therapy for patients with RMS of the female genital tract? Cancer 2001, 91:2454–2468.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wexler LH, Crist LM, Helman LJ: Rhabdomyosarcoma and the undifferentiated sarcomas. In Principles and Practice of Pediatric Oncology. Edited by Pizzo PA, Poplack DG. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002:939–971. This chapter is a thorough overview of RMS. The text explores topics ranging from epidemiology and molecular biology to diagnosis and treatment.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Blakely ML, Harting MT, Andrassy RJ: Rhabdomyosarcoma. In Pediatric Surgery. Edited by Ashcraft KW, Holcomb GW, Murphy JP. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Company, in press.

  5. Lawrence W Jr, Hays DM, Heyn R, et al.: Lymphatic metastases with childhood rhabdomyosarcoma: a report from the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study. Cancer 1987, 60:910–915.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Raney RB, Anderson JR, Barr FG, et al.: RMS and undifferentiated sarcoma in the 1st two decades of life: a selective review of IRSG experience and rationale for IRS-IV. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2001, 23:215–220.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Andrassy RJ, Wiener ES, Raney RB, et al.: Progress in the surgical management of vaginal RMS: a 25-year review from the IRSG. J Pediatr Surg 1999, 34:731–735. A focused review of the specific surgical management of 72 patients with vaginal RMS who were enrolled in IRS-I to IRS-IV. The authors conclude that primary chemotherapy, followed by a conservative surgical approach, constitutes optimal treatment.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cassady JR: How much is enough? The continuing evolution of therapy in childhood rhabdomyosarcoma and its refinement. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995, 31:675–676.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Andrassy RJ: Advances in the surgical management of sarcomas in children. Am J Surg 2002, 184:484–491.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hays DM, Lawrence W, Wharam M, et al.: Primary reexcision for patients with microscopic residual tumor following initial excision of trunk and extremity sites. J Pediatr Surg 1989, 24:5–10.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Neville HL, Andrassy RJ, Lobe TE, et al.: Preoperative staging, prognostic factors, and outcome for extremity rhabdomyosarcoma: a preliminary report from IRS IV (1991-1997). J Pediatr Surg 2000, 35:317–321.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Schalow EL, Braecker BH: Role of surgery in children with rhabdomyosarcoma. Med Pediatr Oncol 2003, 41:1–6.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hays DM, Raney RB, Crist WM, et al.: Secondary surgical procedures to evaluate primary tumor status in patients with chemotherapy and responsive stage III and IV sarcomas: a report from the IRS. J Pediatr Surg 1990, 25:1100–1105.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Godzinski J, Flamant F, Rey A, et al.: Value of postchemotherapy bioptical verification of complete clinical remission in previously unresected (stage I and IIpT3) malignant mesenchymal tumors in children: International Society of Pediatric Oncology 1984 Malignant Mesenchymal Tumors Study. Med Pediatr Oncol 1994, 22:22–26.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Pappo AS, Anderson JR, Crist WM, et al.: Survival postrelapse in children and adolescents with rhabdomyosarcoma: a report from the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Group. J Clin Oncol 1999, 17:3487–3493.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Breneman JC, Lyden E, Pappo AS, et al.: Prognostic factors and clinical outcomes in children and adolescents with metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma: a report from the IRS IV. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:78–84.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fletcher BD, Kaste SC: Magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis and follow-up of genitourinary, pelvic, and perineal RMS. Urol Radiol 1992, 14:263–272.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Finelli A, Babyn P, Lorie GA, et al.: The use of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and follow-up of pediatric pelvic RMS. J Urol 2000, 163:1952–1953.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Division of Pediatric Surgery, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, MSB 5.254, 6431 Fannin, 77030, Houston, TX, USA

    Martin L. Blakely MD

Authors
  1. Matthew T. Harting MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin L. Blakely MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Richard J. Andrassy MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Harting, M.T., Blakely, M.L. & Andrassy, R.J. Surgical management of gynecologic rhabdomyosarcoma. Curr. Treat. Options in Oncol. 5, 109–118 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-004-0043-1

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-004-0043-1

Keywords

  • Topotecan
  • Rhabdomyosarcoma
  • Clinical Group
  • Pelvic Exenteration
  • Gynecologic Tumor