Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A critical overview of concurrent chemoradiotherapy in cervical cancer

  • Published:
Current Oncology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In February 1999, the National Cancer Institute of the US National Institutes of Health issued a communication stating that concurrent chemoradiotherapy should be considered as standard treatment for cervical cancer. This statement was based on the publication of five randomized prospective trials. On the basis of a critical review of these papers and others that identified different results, questions, doubts, and concerns have arisen about this therapeutic method. We analyzed the quality of the control groups managed with the standard treatment, noting data that may have altered these results, as well as analyzing the quality of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and treatment compliance. In light of this analysis, we believe that further trials should be carried out with fairly balanced prognostic factors to demonstrate beyond a doubt that concurrent chemoradiotherapy is superior to radiotherapy alone. In developing countries where resources are scarce, this type of tumor is found frequently. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy would involve increased costs and supportive care, taking away resources from other vital areas.

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

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Parkin DM, Pisani P, Ferlay J: Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 1999, 49:39–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. The 1988 Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytological diagnoses. National Cancer Institute Workshop. JAMA 1989, 262:931–934.

  3. Souhami L, Gil RA, Allan SE, et al.: A randomized trial of chemotherapy followed by pelvic radiation therapy in stage IIIB carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol 1991, 9:970–977.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sundfor K, Trope C, Hogberg T, et al.: Radiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for cervical carcinoma. Cancer 1996, 77:2371–2378.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Leborgne F, Leborgne J, Doldan R, et al.: Induction chemotherapy and radiotherapy of advanced cancer of the cervix: a pilot study and phase III randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997, 37:343–350.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Tattersall MHN, Lorvidhaya V, Vootiprux V, et al., for the Cervical Cancer Study Group of the Asian Oceanian Clinical Oncology Association: A randomized trial of epirubicin and cisplatin chemotherapy followed by pelvic radiation in locally advanced cervical cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995, 13:444–451.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kumar L, Kaushal R, Nandy M, et al.: Chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in locally advanced cervical cancer: a randomized study. Gynecol Oncol 1994, 54:307–315.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Tierney J, Stewart L, Parmar M, et al.: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advancer cervical cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 21 randomised trials. Eur J Cancer 2003, 39:2470–2486. This meta-analysis demonstrates that neoadjuvant chemotherapy in cervical cancer represents a benefit only when it is given in high doses in a short cycle length. A low dose with a cycle length longer than 15 days decreases survival.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fu KK: Biological basis for the interaction of chemotherapeutic agents and radiation therapy. Cancer 1985, 55(Suppl):2123–2130.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. National Cancer Institute Clinical Announcement: Concurrent Chemoradiation for Cervical Cancer. Bethesda, MD: NCI; February 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Whitney CW, Sause W, Bundy BN, et al.: Randomized comparison of fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus hydroxyurea as an adjunct to radiation therapy in stage IIB-IVA carcinoma of the cervix with negative para-aortic lymph nodes: a Gynecologic Oncology Group and Southwest Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 1999, 17:1339–1348.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rose PG, Bundy BN, Watkins EB, et al.: Concurrent cisplatinbased radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 1999, 340:1144–1153.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Keys HM, Bundy BN, Stehman FB, et al.: Cisplatin, radiation, and adjuvant hysterectomy compared with radiation and adjuvant hysterectomy for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1999, 340:1154–1161. This trial showed that concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stage Ib2 disease, with negative lymph nodes, improves survival in comparison with radiotherapy alone.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Morris M, Eifel PJ, Lu J, et al.: Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high-risk cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 1999, 340:1137–1143. These authors demonstrated that, in stage Ib2 disease with positive lymph nodes or stage IIb/IVa, survival is improved with concurrent chemoradiotherapy, compared with extended-field radiotherapy alone.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Peters WA, Liu PY, Barrett RJ, et al.: Concurrent chemotherapy and pelvic radiation therapy compared with pelvic radiation therapy alone as adjuvant therapy after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage cancer of the cervix. J Clin Oncol 2000, 18:1606–1613.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Eifel P, Winter K, Morris M, et al.: Pelvic irradiation with concurrent chemotherapy versus pelvic and para-aortic irradiation for high-risk cervical cancer: an update of radiation therapy oncology group trial (RTOG) 90-01. J Clin Oncol 2004, 22:872–880.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pearcey R, Brundage M, Drouin P, et al.: Phase III trial comparing radical radiotherapy with and without cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with advanced squamous cell cancer of the cervix. J Clin Oncol 2002, 20:966–972. This trial did not find significant differences for stage Ib2/IVa disease managed with concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Vidaurreta J, Bermúdez A, Sardi J, et al.: Laparoscopic staging in locally advanced cervical carcinoma: a new possible philosophy? Gynecol Oncol 1999, 75:366–371. This trial demonstrated the high incidence of positive lymph nodes in stages Ib2/IV disease when laparoscopic staging was used. The positive lymph node incidence in the same stage also increased with larger tumor volume. In addition, this study demonstrated that CT scanning is not sensitive for detection in these patients.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rotman M, Pajak TF, Choi K, et al.: Prophylactic extended-field irradiation of para-aortic lymph nodes in stages IIB and bulky IB and IIA cervical carcinomas: ten-year treatment results of RTOG 79-20. JAMA 1995, 274:387–393.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology: Staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines of gynaecologic cancers. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2000, 70:207–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hacker NF, Wain GV, Nicklin JL: Resection of bulky positive lymph nodes in patients with cervical carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1995, 5:250–256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Cosin JA, Fowler JM, Chen MD, et al.: Pretreatment surgical staging of patients with cervical carcinoma: the case for lymph node debulking. Cancer 1998, 82:2241–2248.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. The Standards of Reporting Trials Group: A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1994, 272:1926–1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Green JA, Kirwan JM, Tierney JF, et al.: Survival and recurrence after concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer of the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2001, 358:781–786.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kirwan JM, Symonds P, Green J, et al.: A systematic review of acute and late toxicity of concomitant chemoradiation for cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol 2003, 68:217–226.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fyles A, Milosevic M, Pintile M, et al.: Anemia, hypoxia and transfusion in patients with cervix cancer: a review. Radiother Oncol 2000, 57:13–19.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Obermair A, Cheuk R, Horwoods K, et al.: Anemia before and during concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with cervical carcinoma: effect on progression free survival. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003, 13:633–639. This study demonstrated the importance of anemia and hypoxia in outcomes of patients with cervical cancer. A relationship was shown between anemia and tumor stage.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Grogan M, Thomas G, Melamed I: The importance of hemoglobin levels during radiotherapy for carcinoma of the cervix. Cancer 1999, 86:1528–1536.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Dunst J, Kuhnt T, Strauss H, et al.: Anemia in cervical cancers: impact on survival, patterns of relapse, and association with hypoxia and angiogenesis. Int J Radiat Oncology Biol Phys 2003, 56:778–787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sundorf K, Trope C, Suo Z, Bergsjo P: Normobaric oxygen treatment during radiotherapy for carcinoma of the uterine cervix: results from a prospective controlled randomized trial. Radiother Oncol 1999, 50:157–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Santin A, Bellone S, Palmieri M, et al.: Effect of blood transfusion during radiotherapy on the immune function of patients with cancer of the uterine cervix: role of interleukin-10. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 54:1345–1355.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Pecorelli S: The Italian gynecological consensus statement on the use of epoetin alfa in the management of anemia. Semin Oncol 2002, 29(Suppl 8):13–15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Possover M, Krause N, Kuhne-Heid R, et al.: Value of laparoscopic evaluation of paraortic and pelvic lymph nodes for treatment of cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998, 178:806–810.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Buenos Aires University Hospital, Pringles 1430, 1183, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Juan E. Sardi MD, María A. Boixadera MD & Juan J. Sardi MD

Authors
  1. Juan E. Sardi MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. María A. Boixadera MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juan J. Sardi 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

Sardi, J.E., Boixadera, M.A. & Sardi, J.J. A critical overview of concurrent chemoradiotherapy in cervical cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 6, 463–470 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-004-0077-3

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-004-0077-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation