Retrospective analysis of prognosis using the Gynecology Oncology Group score of stage IB‑IIA node negative uterine cervical cancer after radical hysterectomy and trachelectomy

Kinjo,Yasuyuki; Matsuura,Yusuke; Ohguri,Takayuki; Aoyama,Yoko; Murakami,Midori; Hoshino,Kaori; Harada,Hiroshi; Ueda,Taeko; Kurita,Tomoko; Kagami,Seiji; Yoshino,Kiyoshi

doi:10.3892/mco.2022.2538

Retrospective analysis of prognosis using the Gynecology Oncology Group score of stage IB‑IIA node negative uterine cervical cancer after radical hysterectomy and trachelectomy

Authors:
- Yasuyuki Kinjo
- Yusuke Matsuura
- Takayuki Ohguri
- Yoko Aoyama
- Midori Murakami
- Kaori Hoshino
- Hiroshi Harada
- Taeko Ueda
- Tomoko Kurita
- Seiji Kagami
- Kiyoshi Yoshino
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Fukuoka 807‑8555, Japan, Department of Nursing of Human Broad Development, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Fukuoka 807‑8555, Japan, Department of Radiology, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Fukuoka 807‑8555, Japan
Published online on: April 19, 2022 https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2022.2538
Article Number: 105
Copyright: © Kinjo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

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

There is currently controversy regarding the criteria for low and intermediate risk of cervical cancer (CC) after surgery. In the present study, the Gynecology Oncology Group (GOG) score was used to detect intermediate risk. Adjuvant radiotherapy was applied in the case of a GOG score >120. The present study aimed to evaluate the validity of the recurrence risk classification using the GOG score for stage IB‑IIA node‑negative CC. All cases of stage IB‑IIA node‑negative CC who underwent radical surgery between February 2007 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The GOG scores were determined from clinical and pathological findings and accordingly, subjects were divided into 4 groups: A, ≤40; B, >40 and ≤70; C, >70 and ≤120; and D, >120. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence‑free survival (RFS) curves were generated using the Kaplan‑Meier method. The log‑rank test produced an estimated P‑value by comparing the OS and RFS of group A (low‑score group) with those of others. The present study included 61 patients (mean age, 47.82 years; age range, 22‑76 years) and the median follow‑up was 79 (39‑149) months. Of these, 60 patients were observed for at least 60 months. During the follow‑up period, the OS and RFS rates of group C were 94.7 and 84.2%, respectively, while those of group D were 100 and 91.7%, respectively; the OS and RFS of groups A and B were 100%. Log‑rank tests for all OS and RFS indicated no significant differences compared to group A. It was indicated that a GOG score ≤70 does not require adjuvant therapy; however, a GOG score >70 requires consideration of adjuvant therapy based on the risk factors which constitute the score.

View Figures

View References

1	Ebina Y, Mikami M, Nagase S, Tabata T, Kaneuchi M, Tashiro H, Mandai M, Enomoto T, Kobayashi Y, Katabuchi H, et al: Japan society of gynecologic oncology guidelines 2017 for the treatment of uterine cervical cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 24:1–19. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
2	Koh W, Abu-Rustum NR, Bean S, Bradley K, Campos SM, Cho KR, Chon HS, Chu C, Clark R, Cohn D, et al: Cervical cancer, version 3.2019, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 17:64–84. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	Reed N, Balega J, Barwick T, Buckley L, Burton K, Eminowicz G, Forrest J, Ganesan R, Harrand R, Holland C, et al: British gynaecological cancer society (BGCS) cervical cancer guidelines: Recommendations for practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 256:433–465. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
4	Delgado G, Bundy B, Zaino R, Sevin BU, Creasman WT and Major F: Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: A gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol. 38:352–357. 1990.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
5	Kridelka FJ, Berg DO, Neuman M, Edwards LS, Robertson G, Grant PT and Hacker NF: Adjuvant small field pelvic radiation for patients with high risk, stage IB lymph node negative cervix carcinoma after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection. A pilot study. Cancer. 86:2059–2065. 1999.PubMed/NCBI
6	Querleu D and Morrow CP: Classification of radical hysterectomy. Lancet Oncol. 9:297–303. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	Chino J, Annunziata CM, Beriwal S, Bradfield L, Erickson BA, Fields EC, Fitch K, Harkenrider MM, Holschneider CH, Kamrava M, et al: Radiation therapy for cervical cancer: Executive summary of an ASTRO clinical practice guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol. 10:220–234. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
8	Kanda Y: Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software ‘EZR’ for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant. 48:452–458. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
9	Yahata H, Sonoda K, Inoue S, Yasutake N, Kodama K, Yagi H, Yasunaga M, Ohgami T, Onoyama I, Kaneki E, et al: Is adjuvant therapy necessary for patients with intermediate-risk cervical cancer after open radical hysterectomy? Oncology. 98:853–858. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
10	Kim K, Kang SB, Chung HH, Kim JW, Park NH and Song YS: Comparison of chemoradiation with radiation as postoperative adjuvant therapy in cervical cancer patients with intermediate-risk factors. Eur J Surg Oncol. 35:192–196. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	Cibula D, Abu-Rustum NR, Fischerova D, Pather S, Lavigne K, Slama J, Alektiar K, Ming-Yin L, Kocian R, Germanova A, et al: Surgical treatment of ‘intermediate risk’ lymph node negative cervical cancer patients without adjuvant radiotherapy-A retrospective cohort study and review of the literature. Gynecol Oncol. 151:438–443. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
12	Sedlis A, Bundy BN, Rotman MZ, Lentz SS, Muderspach LI and Zaino RJ: A randomized trial of pelvic radiation therapy versus no further therapy in selected patients with stage IB carcinoma of the cervix after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy: A gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol. 73:177–183. 1999.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
13	Rotman M, Sedlis A, Piedmonte MR, Bundy B, Lentz SS, Muderspach LI and Zaino RJ: A phase III randomized trial of postoperative pelvic irradiation in stage IB cervical carcinoma with poor prognostic features: Follow-up of a gynecologic oncology group study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 65:169–176. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
14	Cao L, Wen H, Feng Z, Han X, Zhu J and Wu X: Role of adjuvant therapy after radical hysterectomy in intermediate-risk, early-stage cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 31:52–58. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
15	Chu R, Zhang Y, Qiao X, Xie L, Chen W, Zhao Y, Xu Y, Yuan Z, Liu X, Yin A, et al: Risk stratification of early-stage cervical cancer with intermediate-risk factors: Model development and validation based on machine learning algorithm. Oncologist. 26:e2217–e2226. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
16	Yeo RM, Chia YN, Namuduri RP, Yap SP, Soong YL, Yam PK, Lim TY and Khoo-Tan HS: Tailoring adjuvant radiotherapy for stage IB-IIA node negative cervical carcinoma after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection using the GOG score. Gynecol Oncol. 123:225–229. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
17	Nakamura K, Kitahara Y, Satoh T, Takei Y, Takano M, Nagao S, Sekiguchi I and Suzuki M: Analysis of the effect of adjuvant radiotherapy on outcomes and complications after radical hysterectomy in FIGO stage IB1 cervical cancer patients with intermediate risk factors (GOTIC study). World J Surg Oncol. 14(173)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
18	National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Cervical Cancer (version 4.2019). https://www.nccn.org/guidelines/guidelines-detail?category=1&id=1426 (accessed September 2019).
19	Matsuo K, Shimada M, Yamaguchi S, Matoda M, Nakanishi T, Kikkawa F, Ohmichi M, Okamoto A, Sugiyama T and Mikami M: Association of radical hysterectomy surgical volume and survival for early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 133:1086–1098. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
20	Takeda N, Sakuragi N, Takeda M, Okamoto K, Kuwabara M, Negishi H, Oikawa M, Yamamoto R, Yamada H and Fujimoto S: Multivariate analysis of histopathologic prognostic factors for invasive cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy and systematic retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 81:1144–1151. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
21	Biewenga P, van der Velden J, Mol BW, Stalpers LJ, Schilthuis MS, van der Steeg JW, Burger MP and Buist MR: Prognostic model for survival in patients with early stage cervical cancer. Cancer. 117:768–776. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
22	Yoneoka Y, Kato MK, Tanase Y, Uno M, Ishikawa M, Murakami T and Kato T: The baseline recurrence risk of patients with intermediate-risk cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 64:226–233. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar