J Gynecol Oncol.  2015 Jan;26(1):32-39. 10.3802/jgo.2015.26.1.32.

Risk group criteria for tailoring adjuvant treatment in patients with endometrial cancer: a validation study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group criteria

• Kong TW
• Chang SJ
• Paek J
• Lee Y
• Chun M
• Ryu HS

• KMID: 2158800
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2015.26.1.32

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study is to validate the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) criteria for adjuvant treatment in a different cohort of patients and to evaluate the simplified risk criteria predicting the prognosis and tailoring adjuvant treatment in patients with surgically staged endometrial cancer.
METHODS
We performed a retrospective analysis of 261 consecutive patients with surgically staged endometrial cancer between January 2000 and February 2013. All patients had complete staging procedures and were surgically staged according to the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system. Clinical and pathologic data were obtained from medical records. We designed the simplified risk criteria for adjuvant treatment according to the risk factors associated with survival. The patients were divided into low and low-intermediate, high-intermediate, and high-risk groups according to the GOG criteria and simplified criteria and their survivals were compared. Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis was used to evaluate the prognostic significance of both criteria.
RESULTS
Median follow-up time was 48 months (range, 10 to 122 months). According to the GOG criteria, we identified 197 low and low-intermediate risk patients, 20 high-intermediate risk patients, and 44 high-risk patients. There were significant differences in disease-free (p<0.001) and overall survival (p<0.001) among the three groups. Using the simplified risk criteria, we identified 189 low and low-intermediate risk patients, 28 high-intermediate risk patients, and 44 high-risk patients. There were significant differences in disease-free (p<0.001) and overall survival (p<0.001) among the three groups. The performance of the simplified criteria (area under the curve [AUC]=0.829 and 0.916 for disease recurrences and deaths, respectively) was as good as the GOG criteria (AUC=0.836 and 0.921 for disease recurrences and deaths, respectively).
CONCLUSION
The simplified criteria may be easily applicable and offer useful information for planning strategy of adjuvant treatment in patients with surgically staged endometrial cancer as the GOG criteria.

Keyword

Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Disease-free Survival; Endometrial Neoplasms; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant; Risk Factors

MeSH Terms

Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
Endometrial Neoplasms/pathology/surgery/*therapy
Female
Humans
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Staging
Prognosis
Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Survival Analysis

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 (A) Disease-free survival and (B) overall survival by the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) criteria and (C) disease-free survival and (D) overall survival by the simplified criteria.

• 

  Fig. 2 Receiver-operating characteristics curve on (A) disease-free survival and (B) overall survival. GOG, Gynecologic Oncology Group.

Reference

1. Creutzberg CL, van Putten WL, Koper PC, Lybeert ML, Jobsen JJ, Warlam-Rodenhuis CC, et al. Surgery and postoperative radiotherapy versus surgery alone for patients with stage-1 endometrial carcinoma: multicentre randomised trial. PORTEC Study Group. Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma. Lancet. 2000; 355:1404–1411.

2. Keys HM, Roberts JA, Brunetto VL, Zaino RJ, Spirtos NM, Bloss JD, et al. A phase III trial of surgery with or without adjunctive external pelvic radiation therapy in intermediate risk endometrial adenocarcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. 2004; 92:744–751.

3. Nout RA, Smit VT, Putter H, Jurgenliemk-Schulz IM, Jobsen JJ, Lutgens LC, et al. Vaginal brachytherapy versus pelvic external beam radiotherapy for patients with endometrial cancer of high-intermediate risk (PORTEC-2): an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Lancet. 2010; 375:816–823.

4. Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009; 105:103–104.

5. Guntupalli SR, Zighelboim I, Kizer NT, Zhang Q, Powell MA, Thaker PH, et al. Lymphovascular space invasion is an independent risk factor for nodal disease and poor outcomes in endometrioid endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012; 124:31–35.

6. Hoffman K, Nekhlyudov L, Deligdisch L. Endometrial carcinoma in elderly women. Gynecol Oncol. 1995; 58:198–201.

7. Sutton GP, Geisler HE, Stehman FB, Young PC, Kimes TM, Ehrlich CE. Features associated with survival and disease-free survival in early endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989; 160:1385–1391.

8. Grigsby PW, Perez CA, Kuten A, Simpson JR, Garcia DM, Camel HM, et al. Clinical stage I endometrial cancer: prognostic factors for local control and distant metastasis and implications of the new FIGO surgical staging system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1992; 22:905–911.

9. Mundt AJ, Waggoner S, Yamada D, Rotmensch J, Connell PP. Age as a prognostic factor for recurrence in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2000; 79:79–85.

10. Fleming ND, Lentz SE, Cass I, Li AJ, Karlan BY, Walsh CS. Is older age a poor prognostic factor in stage I and II endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2011; 120:189–192.

11. Fanning J. Long-term survival of intermediate risk endometrial cancer (stage IG3, IC, II) treated with full lymphadenectomy and brachytherapy without teletherapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2001; 82:371–374.

12. Ahmed A, Zamba G, DeGeest K, Lynch CF. The impact of surgery on survival of elderly women with endometrial cancer in the SEER program from 1992-2002. Gynecol Oncol. 2008; 111:35–40.

13. Truong PT, Kader HA, Lacy B, Lesperance M, MacNeil MV, Berthelet E, et al. The effects of age and comorbidity on treatment and outcomes in women with endometrial cancer. Am J Clin Oncol. 2005; 28:157–164.

14. Briet JM, Hollema H, Reesink N, Aalders JG, Mourits MJ, ten Hoor KA, et al. Lymphvascular space involvement: an independent prognostic factor in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2005; 96:799–804.

15. Nofech-Mozes S, Ackerman I, Ghorab Z, Ismiil N, Thomas G, Covens A, et al. Lymphovascular invasion is a significant predictor for distant recurrence in patients with early-stage endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008; 129:912–917.

16. O'Brien DJ, Flannelly G, Mooney EE, Foley M. Lymphovascular space involvement in early stage well-differentiated endometrial cancer is associated with increased mortality. BJOG. 2009; 116:991–994.

17. Narayan K, Khaw P, Bernshaw D, Mileshkin L, Kondalsamy-Chennakesavan S. Prognostic significance of lymphovascular space invasion and nodal involvement in intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer patients treated with curative intent using surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2012; 22:260–266.

18. Weinberg LE, Kunos CA, Zanotti KM. Lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) is an isolated poor prognostic factor for recurrence and survival among women with intermediate- to high-risk early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013; 23:1438–1445.

19. Honore LH, Hanson J. Statistical analysis of pathologic risk factors for intramyometrial lymphvascular space involvement in myoinvasive endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006; 16:1330–1335.

20. Akbayir O, Corbacioglu A, Goksedef BP, Numanoglu C, Akca A, Guraslan H, et al. The novel criteria for predicting pelvic lymph node metastasis in endometrioid adenocarcinoma of endometrium. Gynecol Oncol. 2012; 125:400–403.

21. Chang SJ, Kong TW, Kim WY, Yoo SC, Yoon JH, Chang KH, et al. Lymph-vascular space invasion as a significant risk factor for isolated para-aortic lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer: a study of 203 consecutive patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011; 18:58–64.

22. Gadducci A, Cosio S, Fabrini MG, Fanucchi A, Barsotti C, Cristofani R, et al. Patterns of failures in endometrial cancer: clinicopathological variables predictive of the risk of local, distant and retroperitoneal failure. Anticancer Res. 2011; 31:3483–3488.

23. Scholten AN, van Putten WL, Beerman H, Smit VT, Koper PC, Lybeert ML, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy for Stage 1 endometrial carcinoma: long-term outcome of the randomized PORTEC trial with central pathology review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005; 63:834–838.

24. Kong TW, Paek J, Chang SJ, Chun M, Chang KH, Ryu HS. Comprehensive staging surgery including complete pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy followed by adjuvant vaginal brachytherapy improves survival rates for intermediate-risk endometrial cancer patients. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2012; 74:68–75.

25. Susumu N, Sagae S, Udagawa Y, Niwa K, Kuramoto H, Satoh S, et al. Randomized phase III trial of pelvic radiotherapy versus cisplatin-based combined chemotherapy in patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer: a Japanese Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. 2008; 108:226–233.

26. Kuoppala T, Maenpaa J, Tomas E, Puistola U, Salmi T, Grenman S, et al. Surgically staged high-risk endometrial cancer: randomized study of adjuvant radiotherapy alone vs. sequential chemo-radiotherapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2008; 110:190–195.

27. Hogberg T, Signorelli M, de Oliveira CF, Fossati R, Lissoni AA, Sorbe B, et al. Sequential adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy in endometrial cancer: results from two randomised studies. Eur J Cancer. 2010; 46:2422–2431.

28. Landrum LM, Nugent EK, Zuna RE, Syzek E, Mannel RS, Moore KN, et al. Phase II trial of vaginal cuff brachytherapy followed by chemotherapy in early stage endometrial cancer patients with high-intermediate risk factors. Gynecol Oncol. 2014; 132:50–54.