From the Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Department of Radiation Oncology, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York; and Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Mar;115(3):585-590. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181d06b68.
To estimate the safety of fertility-conserving surgery for stage IA1 cervical cancer and to analyze predictors of access to conization.
We analyzed women with stage IA1 cervical cancer aged 40 years or younger who were diagnosed between 1988 and 2005 and recorded in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The outcomes of hysterectomy were compared with fertility-conserving conization. Clinical and demographic characteristics were compared using chi2. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to examine predictors of conization. Survival was examined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models and the Kaplan-Meier method.
A total of 1,409 patients were identified, including 841 (60%) who underwent hysterectomy and 568 (40%) who underwent conization. In a multivariable logistic regression of factors associated with conization, Asian patients, single women, those diagnosed in the later years of the study, and those residing in the eastern United States were more likely to have fertility-conserving surgery. Compared with women younger than 30 years, those older than 35 years were 78% (odds ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16-0.30) less likely to undergo conization. In a Cox proportional hazards model accounting for other prognostic variables, there was no difference in survival (hazard ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.23-1.47) between conization and hysterectomy. Five-year survival for women who underwent conization was 98% (95% CI 96-99%), compared with 99% (95% CI 97-99%) for those treated with hysterectomy.
Fertility-conserving surgery is safe for young women with stage IA1 squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. Young women with microinvasive cervical tumors should weigh the risks and benefits of conization in the context of individual preferences and tumor characteristics.
评估保留生育功能手术治疗 IA1 期宫颈癌的安全性,并分析接受锥切术的预测因素。
我们分析了 1988 年至 2005 年间诊断为 IA1 期宫颈癌且年龄在 40 岁以下的患者,这些患者的信息被记录在监测、流行病学和最终结果数据库中。比较了子宫切除术与保留生育功能的锥切术的结果。使用卡方检验比较了临床和人口统计学特征。使用多变量逻辑回归模型检查了锥切术的预测因素。使用多变量 Cox 比例风险模型和 Kaplan-Meier 方法检查了生存情况。
共确定了 1409 例患者,其中 841 例(60%)接受了子宫切除术,568 例(40%)接受了锥切术。在多变量逻辑回归分析中,与锥切术相关的因素包括:亚洲患者、单身女性、研究后期诊断的患者以及居住在美国东部的患者。与 30 岁以下的女性相比,35 岁以上的女性行锥切术的可能性低 78%(优势比 0.22,95%置信区间 [CI] 0.16-0.30)。在考虑其他预后变量的 Cox 比例风险模型中,锥切术与子宫切除术的生存情况无差异(风险比 0.65,95% CI 0.23-1.47)。行锥切术的女性 5 年生存率为 98%(95% CI 96-99%),而行子宫切除术的女性为 99%(95% CI 97-99%)。
保留生育功能手术对 IA1 期宫颈鳞癌的年轻女性是安全的。年轻的微浸润宫颈癌患者应根据个人偏好和肿瘤特征权衡锥切术的风险和获益。