Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cervical Cancer in the Elderly: Staging and Surgical Management

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Management of Gynecological Cancers in Older Women

  • 763 Accesses

Abstract

Cervical cancer is the third most common cancer in the world with 85 % of these cases occurring in developing countries [34, 35]. Cervical cancer is clinically staged with the assistance of a detailed physical exam and limited radiologic imaging. Cervical cancer that is limited to the cervix can be treated with surgery, while cervical cancer that has spread beyond the cervix is treated with a combination of radiation and sensitizing chemotherapy. Patients with a central, localized recurrence are also treated surgically with a pelvic exenteration. Elderly patients comprise a small portion of cervical cancer patients, and they are less likely to undergo surgical treatment.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

ACRIN:

American College of Radiology Imaging Network

CIN:

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

CKC:

Cold knife cone

CT:

Computed tomography

FDG:

F-fluorodeoxyglucose

FIGO:

International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics

GOG:

Gynecologic Oncology Group

IVP:

Intravenous pyelogram

LEEP:

Loop electrosurgical excision procedure

LSIL:

Low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

N2O:

Nitrous oxide

PET:

Positron emission tomography

SEER:

Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results

SGO:

Society of Gynecologic Oncology

References

  1. Ali-El-Dein B, Shaaban AA, Abu-Eideh RH, El-Azab M, Ashamallah A, Ghoneim MA. Surgical complications following radical cystectomy and orthotopic neobladders in women. J Urol. 2008;108:206–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bansal N, Herzog TJ, Shaw RE, Burke WM, Deutsch I, Wright JD. Primary therapy for early-stage cervical cancer: radical hysterectomy vs radiation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201:485.e1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Benn T, Brooks RA, Zhang Q, Powell MA, Thaker PH, Mutch DG, et al. Pelvic exenteration in gynecologic oncology: a single institution study over 20 years. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;122(1): 14–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Berek JS, Howe C, Lagasse LD, Hacker NF. Pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecologic malignancy: survival and morbidity analysis of the 45-year experience at UCLA. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;99:153–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bricker EM. Bladder substitution after pelvic evisceration. Surg Clin North Am. 1950;30: 1511–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Brunschwig A. Complete excision of pelvic viscera for advanced carcinoma. Cancer. 1948;1:177–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Chapman GW. Survival of advanced Age females with cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 1992;46:287–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chapman GW. Patterns of cervical carcinoma in women of advanced age. J Natl Med Assoc. 1997;89(12):801–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen SW, Liang JA, Yang SN, Lin FJ. High dose-rate brachytherapy for elderly patients with uterine cervical cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2003;33(5):221–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chung HH, Kang KW, Cho JY, Kim JW, Park NH, Song YS, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in preoperative lymph node detection of uterine cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(2):156.e1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Coker AL, Xianglin LD, Fang S, Eggleston KS. Socioeconomic status and cervical cancer survival among older women: findings from the SEER–Medicare linked data cohorts. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;102:278–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Creasman WT. New gynecologic cancer staging. Gynecol Oncol. 1995;58(2):157–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Davis MA, Adams S, Eun D, Lee D, Randall TC. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic exenteration in recurrent cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;202(6):663.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. De Rijkea JM, Van der Puttenb HWHM, Lutgensc LCHW, Voogdd AC, Kruitwagene RFPM, Van Dijckf JAAM, et al. Age-specific differences in treatment and survival of patients with cervical cancer in the southeast of the Netherlands, 1986–1996. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38: 2041–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Estape R, Mendez LE, Angioli R, Penalver M. Urinary diversion in gynecologic oncology. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;81(4):781–97.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ferris DO, Hodel HM. Electrolyte pattern of the blood after bilateral ureterosigmoidostomy. J Am Med Assoc. 1950;142:634–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;105:103–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fleisch MC, Pantke P, Beckmann MW, Schnuerch HG, Ackermann R, Grimm MO, et al. Predictors for long-term survival after interdisciplinary salvage surgery for advanced or recurrent gynecologic cancers. J Surg Oncol. 2007;95(6):476–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Fontana D, Bellina M, Fasolis G, Frea R, Scarpa M, Mari M, et al. Y-neobladder: an easy, fast, and reliable procedure. Urology. 2004;64(3):699–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Forner DM, Lampe B. Exenteration as a primary treatment for locally advanced cervical ­cancer: long-term results and prognostic factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205(2):148.e1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fuchtner C, Manetta A, Walker JL, Emma D, Berman M, et al. Radical hysterectomy in the elderly patient: analysis of morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166(2):593–7.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Goldberg GL, Sukumvanich P, Einstein MH, Smith HO, Anderson PS, Fields AL. Total pelvic exenteration: the Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Montefiore Medical Center experience (1987 to 2003). Gynecol Oncol. 2006;101:261–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Goodwin JS, Samet JM, Hunt WC. Determinants of survival in older cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996;88(15):1031–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hancke K, Heilmann V, Straka P, Kreienberg R, Kurzeder C. Pretreatment staging of cervical cancer: is imaging better than palpation? Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(10):2856–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hatch KD, Berek JS. Pelvic exenteration. In: Berek JS, Hacker NF, editors. Gynecologic oncology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2010. p. 803–17.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hautmann RE, de Petriconi R, Gottfried HW, Kleinschmidt K, Mattes R, Paiss T. The ileal neobladder: complications and functional results in 363 patients after 11 years of follow up. J Urol. 1999;161:422.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hautmann RE, Hautmann SH, Hautmann O. Complications associated with urinary diversion. Nat Rev Urol. 2011;8(12):667–77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hawighorst-Knapstein S, Schonefuß G, Hoffmann SO, Knapstein PG. Pelvic exenteration: effects of surgery on quality of life and body image – a prospective longitudinal study. Gynecol Oncol. 1997;66:495–500.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Hida J, Yasutomi M, Fujimoto K, Okuno K, Ieda S, Machidera N, et al. Functional outcome after low anterior resection with low anastomosis for rectal cancer using the colonic J-pouch. Prospective randomized study for determination of optimum pouch size. Dis Colon Rectum. 1996;39(9):986–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Hida J, Yoshifuji T, Matsuzaki T, Hattori T, Ueda K, Ishimaru E. Long-term functional changes after low anterior resection for rectal cancer compared between a colonic J-pouch and a straight anastomosis. Hepatogastroenterology. 2007;54(74):407–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Horn LC, Fischer U, Raptis G, Bilek K, Hentschel B. Tumor size is of prognostic value in surgically treated FIGO stage II cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;107:310–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hricak H, Gatsonis C, Chi D, Amendola M, Brandt K, Schwartz L, et al. Role of imaging in pretreatment evaluation of early invasive cervical cancer: results of the intergroup study American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6651 – Gynecologic Oncology Group 183. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:9329–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hyuck JC, Roh JW, Seo SS, Lee S, Kim JY, Kim SK, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the presurgical detection of lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma. Cancer. 2006;106(4):914–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Cervical Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide in 2008. http://globocan.iarc.fr/factsheets/cancers/cervix.asp. Accessed 1 Jan 2012.

  35. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60:277–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Jewell EL, Kulasingam S, Myers ER, Alvarez-Secord A, Havrilesky LJ. Primary surgery versus chemoradiation in the treatment of IB2 cervical carcinoma: a cost effectiveness analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;107:532–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Jover R, Lourido D, Gonzalez C, Rojo A, Gorospe L, Alfonso JM. Role of PET/CT in the evaluation of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110:S55–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kaufmann OG, Young JL, Sountoulides P, Kaplan AG, Dash A, Ornstein DK. Robotic radical anterior pelvic exenteration: the UCI experience. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2011;20(4):240–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Rader JS, Mutch DG, Powell MA, et al. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography I cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(12):2108–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. Pelvic lymph node F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake as a prognostic biomarker in newly diagnosed patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Cancer. 2010;116(6):1469–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Kim YT, Kim SW, Hyung WJ, Lee SJ, Nam EJ, Lee WJ. Robotic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical cancer: a pilot study. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;108:312–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kim SK, Choi HJ, Park SY, Lee HY, Seo SS, Yoo CW, et al. Additional value of MR/PET fusion compared with PET/CT in the detection of lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:2103–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Kizer NT, Zighelboim I, Case AS, Dewdney SB, Premal H, Thaker L, et al. The role of PET/CT in the management of patients with cervical cancer: practice patterns of the members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114(2):310–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ko EM, Muto MG, Berkowitz RS, Feltmate CM. Robotic versus open radical hysterectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111(3):425–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Kodama S, Kanazawa K, Honma S, Tanaka K. Age as a prognostic factor in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Cancer. 1991;68:2481–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. LaPolla JP, Schlaerth JB, Gaddis O, Morrow CP. The influence of surgical staging on the evaluation and treatment of patients with cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 1986;24: 194–206.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Lawhead RA, Clark DGC, Smith DH, Pierce VK, Lewis JL. Pelvic exenteration for recurrent or persistent gynecologic malignancies: a 10-year review of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center experience (1972–1981). Gynecol Oncol. 1989;33:279–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Mabrouk M, Frumovitz M, Greer M, Sharma S, Schmeler K, Soliman PT, et al. Trends in laparoscopic and robotic surgery among gynecologic oncologists: a survey update. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112:501–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Maggioni A, Minig L, Zanagnolo V, Peiretti M, Sanguineti F, Bocciolone L, et al. Robotic approach for cervical cancer: comparison with laparotomy. A case control study. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;115(1):60–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Maggioni A, Roviglione G, Landoni F, Zanagnolo V, Peiretti M, Colombo N, et al. Pelvic exenteration: ten-year experience at the European Institute of Oncology in Milan. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114:64–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Miller B, Morris M, Rutledge F, Mitchell MF, Atkinson EN, Burke TW, et al. Aborted exenterative procedures in recurrent cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1993;50:94–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F, Reinhold C, Thomas G, Amendola MA, et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: MRI and CT predictors of lymphatic metastases in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 intergroup study. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112(1):95–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Monk BJ, Tewari KS. Invasive cervical cancer. In: DiSia PJ, Creasman WT, editors. Clinical gynecologic oncology. Philadelphia: Mosby; 2007. p. 55–124.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  55. Morley GW, Seski JC. Radical pelvic surgery versus radiation therapy for stage I carcinoma of the cervix (exclusive of microinvasion). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1976;126(7):785–98.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Newton M. Radical hysterectomy or radiotherapy for stage I cervical cancer. A prospective comparison with 5 and 10 years follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1975;123(5):535–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Nick AM, Frumovitz MM, Soliman PT, Schmeler KM, Ramirez PT. Fertility sparing surgery for treatment of early-stage cervical cancer: open vs. robotic radical trachelectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;124:276–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Ozsarlak O, Tjalma W, Schepens E, Corthouts B, Op De Beeck B, Van Marck E, et al. The correlation of preoperative CT, MR imaging, and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings in primary cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(10):2238–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Estimating the world cancer burden. Globocan 2000. Int J Cancer. 2001;94:153–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Pecorelli S, Zigliani L, Odicino F. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;105(2):107–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Pruthi RS, Stefaniak H, Hubbard JS, Wallen EM. Robotic anterior pelvic exenteration for bladder cancer in the female: outcomes and comparisons to their male counterparts. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2009;19(1):23–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Quinn MA, Benedet JL, Odicino F, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;95(suppl 1):S43–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Randall ME, Micheal H, Long H, Tedjarati S. Uterine cervix. In: Barakat RR, Markman M, Randall ME, editors. Principles and practice of gynecologic oncology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2009. p. 623–82.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Renato S, Mabrouk M, Serena S, Giula M, Giula F, Giula G, et al. Robot-assisted radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: review of surgical and oncological outcomes. ISRN Obstet Gynecol. 2011;2011:872434.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. SEER database http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1973_1999/cervix.pdf.

  66. Sharma C, Deutsch I, Horowitz DP, Hershman DL, Lewin SN, Lu YS, et al. Patterns of care and treatment outcomes for elderly women with cervical cancer. Cancer. 2011;118(14):3618–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Shingleton HM, Soong SJ, Gelder MS, Hatch KD, Baker VV, Austin JM. Clinical and histopathologic factors predicting recurrence and survival after pelvic exenteration for cancer of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol. 1989;73(6):1027–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Small W, Vern TZ, Rademaker A, Nemcek A, Spies S, Schink JC, et al. A prospective trial comparing lymphangiogram, cross-sectional imaging, and positron emission tomography scan in the detection of lymph node metastasis in locally advanced cervical cancer. Am J Clin Oncol. 2010;33(1):89–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Soper JT, Berchuck A, Creasman WT, Clarke-Pearson DL. Pelvic exenteration: factors associated with major surgical morbidity. Gynecol Oncol. 1989;35:93–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. U.S. Population Projections. 2011. http://www.census.gov/population/wwwprojections/summarytables.html

  71. Vasilescu C, Tudor S, Popa M, Aldea B, Gluck G. Entirely robotic total pelvic exenteration. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2011;21(4):e200–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Wright JD, Dehdashti F, Herzog TJ, Mutch DG, Huettner PC, Rader JS, et al. Preoperative lymph node staging of early-stage cervical carcinoma by {18F}-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography. Cancer. 2005;104(11):2484–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Yancik R, Ries LA. Aging and cancer in America demographic and epidemiologic perspectives. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2000;14(1):17–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Yancik R, Ries LAG. Cancer in older persons: an international issue in an aging world. Semin Oncol. 2004;31(2):128–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, 107 Manning Dr., B103 Physicians Office Building, 7572, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7572, USA

    Amanda L. Jackson M.D. & Linda Van Le M.D.

Authors
  1. Amanda L. Jackson M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Linda Van Le M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amanda L. Jackson M.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Commack Road, Commack, 11725, New York, USA

    Stuart M. Lichtman

  2. University of Liverpool, St Helens Teach, Marshalls Cross Road, St Helens, WA9 3DA, United Kingdom

    Riccardo A. Audisio

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jackson, A.L., Van Le, L. (2013). Cervical Cancer in the Elderly: Staging and Surgical Management. In: Lichtman, S., Audisio, R. (eds) Management of Gynecological Cancers in Older Women. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4605-6_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4605-6_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-2215-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4605-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation