Adjuvant Radiation Field Extent and Sites of Failure in Node Positive Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer

被引:0
|
作者
Yerramilli, Divya [1 ]
Chen, Yu-Hui [2 ]
Venkatachalam, Veena [1 ,3 ]
Alban, Gabriela M. [2 ]
Buscariollo, Daniela L. [2 ,4 ]
Cheng, Teresa [2 ]
King, Martin T. [2 ]
Pretz, Jennifer L. [2 ]
Russo, Andrea L. [3 ]
Lee, Larissa J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 USA
[2] Harvard Med Sch, Dept Radiat Oncol, Dana Farber Canc Inst, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[4] Swedish Canc Inst, Dept Radiat Oncol, Seattle, WA USA
关键词
STAGE-I; CHEMOTHERAPY; CARCINOMA; RADIOTHERAPY; MANAGEMENT; THERAPY;
D O I
10.1016/j.prro.2021.04.006
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: In patients with node-positive endometrial cancer, adjuvant radiation therapy with chemotherapy decreases local-regional recurrence compared with chemotherapy alone. However, the optimal radiation field borders and extent of nodal coverage have not been well studied. In a multi-institutional cohort, survival outcomes and sites of failure were analyzed for patients with International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC endometrioid endometrial cancer treated with pelvic radiation therapy (PRT) versus extended-field radiation therapy (EFRT), which encompassed high para-aortic lymph nodes. Methods and Materials: In a multi-institutional retrospective study, 143 patients with FIGO stage IIIC1 or IIIC2 endometrioid endometrial cancer treated with adjuvant radiation therapy from 2000 to 2016 were identified. Patient subgroups were classified by substage and radiation field extent: stage IIIC1 received EFRT, stage IIIC1 received PRT, and stage IIIC2 received EFRT. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and out-of-field recurrence were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Sites of failure were categorized as within or outside the radiation field. Results: The median follow-up was 59 months; 87% of patients received chemotherapy. The 5-year RFS and OS rates were 73% and 87%, respectively. By subgroup, 5-year RFS rates were 79% for stage IIIC1 EFRT, 73% for stage IIIC1 PRT, and 69% for stage IIIC2 EFRT (P = .4). On multivariate analysis, the recurrence risk was highest for stage IIIC2 EFRT, although this result was not statistically significant (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.0; P = .4). In-field vaginal and nodal recurrences were observed in 2 patients (1%) and 4 patients (3%), respectively. Of 78 patients with stage IIIC1 cancer treated with PRT, 5 (6%) had isolated para-aortic nodal relapse outside the radiation field; 3 were long-term survivors (more than 6 years after salvage therapy). For patients with para-aortic recurrence, 86% had lymphovascular invasion, 71% had myometrial invasion of >= 50%, and 57% had grade 3 disease. Conclusions: Adjuvant chemoradiation therapy resulted in excellent survival outcomes for patients with FIGO stage IIIC endometrioid endometrial cancer. For patients with positive pelvic nodes, isolated para-aortic relapse outside the PRT field was uncommon and amenable to salvage therapy. (C) 2021 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:394 / 403
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Impact of Lymph Node Ratio and Adjuvant Therapy in Node-Positive Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer
    Fleming, Nicole D.
    Soliman, Pamela T.
    Westin, Shannon N.
    dos Reis, Ricardo
    Munsell, Mark
    Klopp, Ann H.
    Frumovitz, Michael
    Nick, Alpa M.
    Schmeler, Kathleen
    Ramirez, Pedro T.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2015, 25 (08) : 1437 - 1444
  • [2] The role of adjuvant radiation in lymph node positive endometrial adenocarcinoma
    Shaikh, Talha
    Churilla, Thomas M.
    Mantia-Smaldone, Gina M.
    Chu, Christina
    Rubin, Stephen C.
    Anderson, Penny R.
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2016, 141 (03) : 434 - 439
  • [3] STAGE IB ENDOMETRIOID TYPE ENDOMETRIAL CANCER: THE ROLE OF LYMPHADENECTOMY AND ADJUVANT RADIATION THERAPY
    Tasci, T.
    Karalok, A.
    Ureyen, I. S. I. N.
    Salihoglu, K.
    Turan, T.
    Tulunay, G.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2015, 25 (09) : 1156 - 1156
  • [4] Management of Node-Positive Endometrial Cancer With Multimodality Adjuvant Therapy
    Klopp, A. H.
    Jhingran, A.
    Juloori, A.
    Perinjelil, V.
    Broaddus, R.
    Lu, K.
    Eifel, P.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2012, 84 (03): : S455 - S455
  • [5] Adjuvant Therapy in Node-Positive Endometrial Cancer: A Focus on Chemotherapy
    Dexter, Julia
    Lips, Erin
    DiSilvestro, Paul
    CURRENT ONCOLOGY REPORTS, 2022, 24 (12) : 1677 - 1683
  • [6] Adjuvant Therapy in Node-Positive Endometrial Cancer: A Focus on Chemotherapy
    Julia Dexter
    Erin Lips
    Paul DiSilvestro
    Current Oncology Reports, 2022, 24 : 1677 - 1683
  • [7] Use of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation in women with node-positive endometrial cancer: A National Cancer Database study.
    Strohl, Anna Everett
    Rydzewski, Nicholas
    Donnelly, Eric Donald
    Kanis, Margaux Jenna
    Shahabi, Shohreh
    Strauss, Jonathan Blake
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 34 (15)
  • [8] Adjuvant radiation therapy in node-positive vulvar cancer
    Xanthopoulos, Eric
    Grover, Surbhi
    Corradetti, Michael Nino
    Mangaali, Margaret
    Heskel, Marina
    Lin, Lilie
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2013, 31 (15)
  • [9] Adjuvant Radiation Therapy in Node-Positive Vulvar Cancer
    Xanthopoulos, E.
    Mitra, N.
    Grover, S.
    Corradetti, M. N.
    Mangaali, M.
    Heskel, M.
    Lin, L.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2013, 87 (02): : S128 - S129
  • [10] Adjuvant Chemotherapy With External Beam Radiation Therapy for High-Grade, Node-Positive Endometrial Cancer
    Lee, Larissa J.
    Bu, Paula
    Feltmate, Colleen
    Viswanathan, Akila N.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2014, 24 (08) : 1441 - 1448