Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Rama VI Road, Bangkok, Thailand.
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010 Nov;20(8):1386-90. doi: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181ef8f4d.
The aims of this study were to retrospectively compare outcomes for patients with cervical cancer who developed bone metastasis later after the primary treatment at the time of diagnosis of cervical cancer with concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) to radiation therapy alone (RT).
We retrospectively analyzed the patients with cervical cancer during the period from January 1998 to December 2007. Of these, 11 patients who received CCRT and 24 patients who received RT went on to develop bone metastasis.
Among 4620 patients with cervical cancer, 51 patients had bone metastases. Sixteen patients were excluded including 10 patients with unavailable records and 6 patients who did not receive CCRT or RT at the time of diagnosis of cervical cancer. Thirty-five patients who had bone metastasis received primary treatment with CCRT or RT. The 2 groups of patients (CCRT vs RT) were similar in age, histologic cell type, and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stages. The characteristics of bone metastasis in both groups were also not significantly different. The patients who received CCRT did not have a better overall survival than the patients who received RT (median, 19 vs 22 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 14.68-23.32 vs 8.56-35.44). They were comparable in the interval from cervical cancer diagnoses to diagnoses of bone metastasis (CCRT group: median, 14 months; 95% CI, 9.14-18.86; RT group: median; 15 months; 95% CI, 10.20-19.80) and the survival after diagnosis of bone metastasis between both groups (CCRT group: median, 4 months; 95% CI, 0.76-7.24; RT group: median, 7 months; 95% CI, 4.70-9.30).
Our retrospective analysis showed that there were no differences in survival benefits observed between the patients with cervical cancer who developed bone metastases later after the primary treatment with CCRT and RT.
本研究旨在回顾性比较同期放化疗（CCRT）与单纯放疗（RT）治疗宫颈癌后发生骨转移的患者的结局。
我们回顾性分析了 1998 年 1 月至 2007 年 12 月期间的宫颈癌患者。其中，11 例接受 CCRT，24 例接受 RT，随后发生骨转移。
在 4620 例宫颈癌患者中，有 51 例发生骨转移。排除 10 例无记录和 6 例诊断时未接受 CCRT 或 RT 的患者后，共有 16 例患者被排除在外。35 例有骨转移的患者接受了 CCRT 或 RT 的初始治疗。2 组患者（CCRT 组与 RT 组）在年龄、组织细胞类型和国际妇产科联合会（FIGO）分期方面相似。2 组的骨转移特征也无显著差异。接受 CCRT 的患者的总生存期不比接受 RT 的患者好（中位，19 个月 vs 22 个月；95%置信区间[CI]，14.68-23.32 个月 vs 8.56-35.44 个月）。从宫颈癌诊断到骨转移诊断的时间间隔（CCRT 组：中位 14 个月；95%CI，9.14-18.86 个月；RT 组：中位 15 个月；95%CI，10.20-19.80 个月）和 2 组患者在骨转移诊断后的生存时间（CCRT 组：中位 4 个月；95%CI，0.76-7.24 个月；RT 组：中位 7 个月；95%CI，4.70-9.30 个月）均无差异。
我们的回顾性分析显示，接受 CCRT 和 RT 治疗后发生骨转移的宫颈癌患者的生存获益无差异。
