The efficacy of anti-angiogenic drugs in gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma: A retrospective study

ObjectivesGastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma (GEA) is a rare malignant tumor that is not associated with high-risk HPV infection, known for its high invasiveness and resistance to current treatments. This study assessed the effectiveness of anti-angiogenic regimens in real-world GEA patients.MethodsPatients with GEA were enrolled between February 2012 and March 2023, and their clinicopathological characteristics were collected from their medical records. The patients were categorized into groups based on whether they received anti-angiogenic treatments or not. Survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method.ResultsA total of 43 GEA patients were enrolled in this study, with 23 cases who received anti-angiogenic drugs (nine received them as the primary treatment, 12 as first-line therapy after recurrence/metastasis, and two as second-line therapy) as the observation group. The other 20 patients who received similar treatments without the anti-angiogenic regimens serve as the control group. Compared to the control group, the addition of anti-angiogenic drugs as the primary treatment mildly extended progression-free survival (PFS) while not being statistically significant (16 months vs 11 months, p = 0.744). The negative results were also observed in 12 patients who started anti-angiogenic therapy as first-line therapy after recurrence/metastasis (8.5 months vs 9 months, p = 0.518). As for the overall survival (OS), no benefits were detected in either patients who started the anti-angiogenic therapy as primary or subsequent treatments (p = 0.499 and 0.450, respectively).ConclusionWe firstly evaluated the efficacy of anti-angiogenic drugs in treating patients with GEA. Although with a small sample size, our preliminary results clearly proposed that the anti-angiogenic therapy failed in suppressing tumors and should not be a preferred choice for GEA. As a much rarer tumor without standard treatments, we herein warned of a pitfall for gynecologic oncologists when facing this malignancy.