Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Anyang Tumor Hospital of Henan Province, Anyang, 455000, China.
BMC Cancer. 2020 Mar 6;20(1):189. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-6651-8.
This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes of radio-chemotherapy (R-CT) and radical hysterectomy with postoperative standard therapy (RH) in stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer patients.
Based on the large amount of diagnostic and treatment cervical cancer data in China, a real-world study and 1:1 case-control matching were used to compare overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in cervical cancer patients.
In this real-world study, the 5-year OS and DFS in the R-CT group (n = 8949) were lower than those in the RH group (n = 18,152). After applying the inclusion criteria, the OS and DFS in the R-CT group (n = 582) were lower than those in the RH group (n = 4308). After 1:1 case-control matching, the 5-year OS and DFS in the R-CT group (n = 535) were lower than those in the RH group (n = 535) (OS: 76.1% vs. 84.6%, p < 0.001, HR = 1.819; DFS: 75.1% vs. 81.5%, p < 0.001, HR = 1.462, respectively). Further stratification showed that for stage IB1 and IIA1 patients, the 5-year OS and DFS in the R-CT group (n = 300) were lower than those in the RH group (n = 300) (OS: 78.9% vs. 87.0%, p < 0.001, HR = 2.160; DFS: 77.0% vs. 84.9%, p < 0.001, HR = 2.053, respectively). In stage IB2 and IIA2 patients, the 5-year OS in the R-CT group (n = 235) was lower than that in the RH group (n = 235) (72.5% vs. 81.5%, p = 0.039; HR = 1.550), but no difference in the 5-year DFS was found between the two groups (72.6% vs. 76.9%, p = 0.151).
Our study found that for stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer patients, RH offers better overall survival and disease-free survival outcomes than R-CT, however, due to the inherent biases of retrospective study, it needs to be confirmed by randomized trials. In addition, we need to further understand the quality of life of the two treatments.
registration number: CHiCTR1800017778; International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Port, http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/. registration date: August 14, 2018.
本研究旨在比较放射化学疗法(R-CT)与根治性子宫切除术联合术后标准治疗(RH)在 IB1-IIA2 期宫颈癌患者中的生存结局。
基于中国大量的宫颈癌诊断和治疗数据,采用真实世界研究和 1:1 病例对照匹配方法,比较了宫颈癌患者的总生存(OS)和无病生存(DFS)。
在本真实世界研究中,R-CT 组(n=8949)的 5 年 OS 和 DFS 低于 RH 组(n=18152)。应用纳入标准后,R-CT 组(n=582)的 OS 和 DFS 仍低于 RH 组(n=4308)。经 1:1 病例对照匹配后,R-CT 组(n=535)的 5 年 OS 和 DFS 仍低于 RH 组(n=535)(OS:76.1% vs. 84.6%,p<0.001,HR=1.819;DFS:75.1% vs. 81.5%,p<0.001,HR=1.462)。进一步分层显示,对于 IB1 和 IIA1 期患者,R-CT 组(n=300)的 5 年 OS 和 DFS 低于 RH 组(n=300)(OS:78.9% vs. 87.0%,p<0.001,HR=2.160;DFS:77.0% vs. 84.9%,p<0.001,HR=2.053)。对于 IB2 和 IIA2 期患者,R-CT 组(n=235)的 5 年 OS 低于 RH 组(n=235)(72.5% vs. 81.5%,p=0.039;HR=1.550),但两组的 5 年 DFS 无差异(72.6% vs. 76.9%,p=0.151)。
本研究发现,对于 IB1-IIA2 期宫颈癌患者,RH 提供了更好的总生存和无病生存结果,但由于回顾性研究的固有偏倚,仍需随机试验证实。此外,我们需要进一步了解两种治疗方法的生活质量。
注册号:CHiCTR1800017778;国际临床试验注册平台搜索端口,http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/。注册日期:2018 年 8 月 14 日。