Skip to main content
Log in

Proposal for a Risk-Based Categorization of Uterine Carcinosarcoma

  • Gynecologic Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To propose a categorization model of uterine carcinosarcoma (UCS) based on tumor cell types (carcinoma and sarcoma) and sarcoma dominance.

Methods

This secondary analysis of a prior multicenter retrospective study examined 889 cases of UCS with available histologic evaluation. Based on survival outcome, cases were clustered into three groups: low-grade carcinoma with nondominant homologous sarcoma [type A, n = 96 (10.8%)], (1) low-grade carcinoma with heterologous sarcoma or any sarcoma dominance and (2) high-grade carcinoma with nondominant homologous sarcoma [type B, n = 412 (46.3%)], and high-grade carcinoma with heterologous sarcoma or any sarcoma dominance [type C, n = 381 (42.9%)]. Tumor characteristics and outcome were examined based on the categorization.

Results

Women in type C category were more likely to be older, obese, and Caucasian, whereas those in type A category were younger, less obese, Asian, and nulligravid (all P < 0.01). Type C tumors were more likely to have metastatic implants, large tumor size, lymphovascular space invasion with sarcoma cells, and higher lymph node ratio, whereas type A tumors were more likely to be early-stage disease and small (all P < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, tumor categorization was independently associated with progression-free survival (5-year rates: 70.1% for type A, 48.3% for type B, and 35.9% for type C, adjusted P < 0.01) and cause-specific survival (5-year rates: 82.8% for type A, 63.0% for type B, and 47.1% for type C, adjusted P < 0.01).

Conclusion

Characteristic differences in clinicopathological factors and outcomes in UCS imply that different underlying etiologies and biological behaviors may be present, supporting a new classification system.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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. Matsuo K, Ross MS, Machida H, Blake EA, Roman LD. Trends of uterine carcinosarcoma in the United States. J Gynecol Oncol. 2018;29:e22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Cherniack AD, Shen H, Walter V, et al. Integrated molecular characterization of uterine carcinosarcoma. Cancer Cell. 2017;31:411–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Zhao S, Bellone S, Lopez S, et al. Mutational landscape of uterine and ovarian carcinosarcomas implicates histone genes in epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016;113:12238–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Matsuo K, Takazawa Y, Ross MS, et al. Significance of histologic pattern of carcinoma and sarcoma components on survival outcomes of uterine carcinosarcoma. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:1257–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Matsuo K, Takazawa Y, Ross MS, et al. Characterizing sarcoma dominance pattern in uterine carcinosarcoma: homologous versus heterologous element. Surg Oncol. 2018;27:433–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Matsuo K, Omatsu K, Ross MS, et al. Impact of adjuvant therapy on recurrence patterns in stage I uterine carcinosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145:78–87.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Matsuo K, Ross MS, Bush SH, et al. Tumor characteristics and survival outcomes of women with tamoxifen-related uterine carcinosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;144:329–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Matsuo K, Johnson MS, Im DD, et al. Survival outcome of women with stage IV uterine carcinosarcoma who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. J Surg Oncol. 2017;117:488–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Matsuo K, Ross MS, Im DD, et al. Significance of venous thromboembolism in women with uterine carcinosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2018;148:267–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Matsuo K, Ross MS, Yunokawa M, et al. Salvage chemotherapy with taxane and platinum for women with recurrent uterine carcinosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2018;147:565–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Matsuo K, Takazawa Y, Ross MS, et al. Significance of lympho-vascular space invasion by sarcomatous component in uterine carcinosarcoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:2756–66.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Hogberg T, Signorelli M, de Oliveira CF, et al. Sequential adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy in endometrial cancer-results from two randomised studies. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:2422–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. de Boer SM, Powell ME, Mileshkin L, et al. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for women with high-risk endometrial cancer (PORTEC-3): final results of an international, open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:295–09.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. https://meetinglibrary.asco.org/record/147011/abstract. Accessed 24 Jan 2018.

  15. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ. 2007;335:806–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sampath S, Gaffney DK. Role of radiotherapy treatment of uterine sarcoma. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;25:761–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rauh-Hain JA, Starbuck KD, Meyer LA, et al. Patterns of care, predictors and outcomes of chemotherapy for uterine carcinosarcoma: a National Cancer Database analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;139:84–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Manzerova J, Sison CP, Gupta D, et al. Adjuvant radiation therapy in uterine carcinosarcoma: a population-based analysis of patient demographic and clinical characteristics, patterns of care and outcomes. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;141:225–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Seagle BL, Kanis M, Kocherginsky M, Strauss JB, Shahabi S. Stage I uterine carcinosarcoma: Matched cohort analyses for lymphadenectomy, chemotherapy, and brachytherapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145:71–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Voss MA, Ganesan R, Ludeman L, McCarthy K, Gornall R, Schaller G, Wei W, Sundar S. Should grade 3 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma be considered a type 2 cancer-a clinical and pathological evaluation. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;124:15–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kandoth C, Schultz N, Cherniack AD, et al. Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma. Nature 2013;497:67–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Ensign Endowment for Gynecologic Cancer Research (K.M.)

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Koji Matsuo.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest for all authors.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 137 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Matsuo, K., Takazawa, Y., Ross, M.S. et al. Proposal for a Risk-Based Categorization of Uterine Carcinosarcoma. Ann Surg Oncol 25, 3676–3684 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6695-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6695-z

Keywords

Navigation