Tumor size and lymph node status determined by imaging are reliable factors for predicting advanced cervical cancer prognosis

Kyung,Min Sun; Kim,Hong  Bae; Seoung,Jung  Yeob; Choi,In  Young; Joo,Young  Soo; Lee,Me  Yeon; Kang,Jung  Bae; Park,Young  Han

doi:10.3892/ol.2015.3015

Tumor size and lymph node status determined by imaging are reliable factors for predicting advanced cervical cancer prognosis

Authors:
- Min Sun Kyung
- Hong Bae Kim
- Jung Yeob Seoung
- In Young Choi
- Young Soo Joo
- Me Yeon Lee
- Jung Bae Kang
- Young Han Park
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University Medical Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Hwasung, Gyeonggi 445-907, Republic of Korea, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University Medical Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoul 150-950, Republic of Korea, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University Medical Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Gyeonggi 431-070, Republic of Korea, Department of Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Gangwon 200-702, Republic of Korea , Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University Medical Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Gyeonggi 431-070, Republic of Korea, Department of Radiation Oncology, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University Medical Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Gyeonggi 431-070, Republic of Korea
Published online on: March 5, 2015 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2015.3015
Pages: 2218-2224

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to investigate the prognostic role of a number of clinical factors in advanced cervical cancer patients. Patients (n=157) with stage IIA‑IIB cervical cancer treated at four Hallym Medical Centers in South Korea (Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital; Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital; Chuncheon Sacred Heart Hospital; and Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital) between 2006 and 2010 were retrospectively enrolled. Univariate analysis identified significant predictive values in the following eight factors: i) Cancer stage (P<0.0001); ii) tumor size (≤4 vs. 4‑6 cm, P=0.0147; and ≤4 vs. >6 cm, P<0.0001); iii) serum squamous cell carcinoma antigen level (≤2 vs. >15 ng/ml; P=0.0291); iv) lower third vaginal involvement (P<0.0001); v) hydronephrosis (P=0.0003); vi) bladder/rectum involvement (P=0.0015); vii) pelvic (P=0.0017) or para‑aortic (P=0.0019) lymph node (LN) metastasis detected by imaging vs. no metastasis; and viii) pelvic LN metastasis identified by pathological analysis (P=0.0289). Furthermore, multivariate analysis determined that tumor size (≤4 vs. 4‑6 cm, P=0.0371; and ≤4 vs. >6 cm, P=0.0024) and pelvic LN metastasis determined by imaging vs. no metastasis (P=0.0499) were independent predictive variables. Therefore, tumor size and pelvic LN metastasis measured by imaging were independent predictive factors for the prognosis of advanced cervical cancer. These factors may provide more clinically significant prognostic information compared with the currently used International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system.

View Figures

View References

1	Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, et al: GLOBOCAN 2008: Cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide. IARC Press; Lyon: 2008
2	Pecorelli S: Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 105:103–104. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Lilic V, Lilic G, Filipovic S, Milosevic J, Tasic M and Stojilijkovic M: Modern treatment of invasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix. J BUON. 14:587–592. 2009.PubMed/NCBI
4	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. 340:1154–1161. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	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. 340:1137–1143. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Rose PG, Bundy BN, Watkins EB, et al: Concurrent cisplatin-based radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 340:1144–1153. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	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. 17:1339–1348. 1999.PubMed/NCBI
8	Kupets R and Covens A: Is the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for cervical carcinoma able to predict survival in patients with cervical carcinoma?: an assessment of clinimetric properties. Cancer. 92:796–804. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Noguchi H, Shiozawa I, Sakai Y, Yamazaki T and Fukuta T: Pelvic lymph node metastasis of uterine cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 27:150–158. 1987. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Avall-Lundqvist EH, Sjövall K, Nilsson BR and Eneroth PH: Prognostic significance of pretreatment serum levels of squamous cell carcinoma antigen and CA 125 in cervical carcinoma. Eur J Cancer. 28A:1695–1702. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Rutledge FN, Mitchell MF, Munsell M, Bass S, McGuffee V and Atkinson EN: Youth as a prognostic factor in carcinoma of the cervix: a matched analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 44:123–130. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Kosary CL: FIGO stage, histology, histologic grade, age and race as prognostic factors in determining survival for cancers of the female gynecological system: an analysis of 1973–87 SEER cases of cancers of the endometrium, cervix, ovary, vulva, and vagina. Semin Surg Oncol. 10:31–46. 1994. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Brewster WR, DiSaia PJ, Monk BJ, Ziogas A, Yamada SD and Anton-Culver H: Young age as a prognostic factor in cervical cancer: results of a population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 180:1464–1467. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Ishikawa H, Nakanishi T, Inoue T and Kuzuya K: Prognostic factors of adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 73:42–46. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Wagenaar HC, Trimbos JB, Postema S, et al: Tumor diameter and volume assessed by magnetic resonance imaging in the prediction of outcome for invasive cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 82:474–482. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Miller TR and Grigsby PW: Measurement of tumor volume by PET to evaluate prognosis in patients with advanced cervical cancer treated by radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 53:353–359. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Tseng JY, Yen MS, Twu NF, et al: Prognostic nomogram for overall survival in stage IIB-IVA cervical cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 202:174. e171–177. 2010.
18	Van Nagell JR Jr, Roddick JW Jr and Lowin DM: The staging of cervical cancer: inevitable discrepancies between clinical staging and pathologic findinges. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 110:973–978. 1971.PubMed/NCBI
19	Averette HE, Ford JH Jr, Dudan RC, Girtanner RE, Hoskins WJ and Lutz MH: Staging of cervical cancer. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 18:215–232. 1975. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Lagasse LD, Creasman WT, Shingleton HM, Ford JH and Blessing JA: Results and complications of operative staging in cervical cancer: experience of the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Gynecol Oncol. 9:90–98. 1980. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Seo Y, Yoo SY, Kim MS, et al: Nomogram prediction of overall survival after curative irradiation for uterine cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 79:782–787. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Behtash N, Karimi Zarchi M and Deldar M: Preoperative prognostic factors and effects of adjuvant therapy on outcomes of early stage cervical cancer in Iran. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 10:613–618. 2009.PubMed/NCBI
23	Angioli R, Plotti F, Montera R, et al: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus radical surgery followed by chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 127:290–296. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Lapitan MC and Buckley BS: Impact of palliative urinary diversion by percutaneous nephrostomy drainage and ureteral stenting among patients with advanced cervical cancer and obstructive uropathy: a prospective cohort. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 37:1061–1070. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Sardi JE, Giaroli A, Sananes C, et al: Long-term follow-up of the first randomized trial using neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage Ib squamous carcinoma of the cervix: the final results. Gynecol Oncol. 67:61–69. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Harima Y, Sawada S, Nagata K, Sougawa M and Ohnishi T: Human papilloma virus (HPV) DNA associated with prognosis of cervical cancer after radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 52:1345–1351. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Riou G, Favre M, Jeannel D, Bourhis J, Le Doussal V and Orth G: Association between poor prognosis in early-stage invasive cervical carcinomas and non-detection of HPV DNA. Lancet. 335:1171–1174. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Higgins GD, Davy M, Roder D, Uzelin DM, Phillips GE and Burrell CJ: Increased age and mortality associated with cervical carcinomas negative for human papillomavirus RNA. Lancet. 338:910–913. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Ikenberg H, Sauerbrei W, Schottmüller U, Spitz C and Pfleiderer A: Human papillomavirus DNA in cervical carcinoma - correlation with clinical data and influence on prognosis. Int J Cancer. 59:322–326. 1994. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
30	Rose BR, Thompson CH, Cossart YE, Elliot PE and Tattersall MH: Papillomavirus DNA and prognosis in cervical cancer. Lancet. 337:4891991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
31	Lombard I, Vincent-Salomon A, Validire P, et al: Human papillomavirus genotype as a major determinant of the course of cervical cancer. J Clin Oncol. 16:2613–2619. 1998.PubMed/NCBI
32	Burger RA, Monk BJ, Kurosaki T, et al: Human papillomavirus type 18: association with poor prognosis in early stage cervical cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 88:1361–1368. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33	Nakanishi T, Ishikawa H, Suzuki Y, Inoue T, Nakamura S and Kuzuya K: A comparison of prognoses of pathologic stage Ib adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 79:289–293. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
34	Eifel PJ, Burke TW, Morris M and Smith TL: Adenocarcinoma as an independent risk factor for disease recurrence in patients with stage IB cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 59:38–44. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
35	Sigurdsson K, Hrafnkelsson J, Geirsson G, Gudmundsson J and Salvarsdóttir A: Screening as a prognostic factor in cervical cancer: analysis of survival and prognostic factors based on Icelandic population data, 1964–1988. Gynecol Oncol. 43:64–70. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Hricak H, Gatsonis C, Chi DS, et al: American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6651; Gynecologic Oncology Group 183: 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. 23:9329–9337. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
37	Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB, Azizi L and Stern JL: Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol. 86:43–50. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
38	Gadducci A, Tana R, Cosio S and Genazzani AR: The serum assay of tumour markers in the prognostic evaluation, treatment monitoring and follow-up of patients with cervical cancer: a review of the literature. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 66:10–20. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
39	Takeda M, Sakuragi N, Okamoto K, et al: Preoperative serum SCC, CA125, and CA19-9 levels and lymph node status in squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 81:451–457. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
40	Kapp DS, Fischer D, Gutierrez E, Kohorn EI and Schwartz PE: Pretreatment prognostic factors in carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a multivariable analysis of the effect of age, stage, histology and blood counts on survival. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 9:445–455. 1983. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
41	Boss EA, Barentsz JO, Massuger LF and Boonstra H: The role of MR imaging in invasive cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 10:256–270. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
42	Kidd EA, El Naqa I, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F and Grigsby PW: FDG-PET-based prognostic nomograms for locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 127:136–140. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI