University of Pennsylvania Health System, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States of America.
University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States of America.
Gynecol Oncol. 2020 Nov;159(2):394-401. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.07.105. Epub 2020 Aug 14.
To determine the impact on overall survival (OS) of different modalities of adjuvant therapy for the treatment of stage III endometrial cancer (EC), by histology.
Stage 3 endometrioid (EAC), serous (SER), clear cell (CC), and carcinosarcoma (CS) patients who underwent primary surgical staging from 2000 to 2013 were identified in SEER-Medicare. Adjuvant therapy was defined by a 4-arm comparator grouping (none; RT only; CT only; combination RT), as well as by an 8-arm comparator grouping (none; RT only; CT only; concurrent CT-RT; concurrent CT-RT then CT; Serial CT-RT; serial RT-CT; sandwich). Modality of RT and CT were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates, log rank tests, and multivariable cox modeling.
Of 2870 cases identified (1798 EAC, 606 SER, 118 CC, 348 CS), 31.5% received no adjuvant therapy. The remainder received RT or CT alone, concurrent RT-CT, serial or sandwich modalities. OS differed by adjuvant therapy in adjusted and unadjusted models, when combining all histologies, and when stratifying by histology using both the 4-arm, and 8-arm comparator analyses (log rank p < .05, all). By histology, in adjusted analyses, sandwich modality had the greatest improvement in OS for endometrioid, but pairwise comparisons did not identify a superior chemotherapy-based regimen. For serous and clear cell, the greatest improvement in OS was seen with concurrent RT-CT, and for carcinosarcoma, CT alone.
OS for advanced EC significantly differs by histology and mode of adjuvant therapy. Future studies should evaluate the efficacy of combination-based adjuvant therapy versus chemotherapy alone, by histologic subtype and molecular signature.
通过组织学确定不同辅助治疗模式对治疗 III 期子宫内膜癌(EC)患者总生存(OS)的影响。
在 SEER-Medicare 中确定了 2000 年至 2013 年期间接受过原发性手术分期的 III 期子宫内膜样癌(EAC)、浆液性(SER)、透明细胞(CC)和癌肉瘤(CS)患者。辅助治疗通过 4 臂比较分组(无治疗;仅放疗;仅化疗;联合放疗和化疗)和 8 臂比较分组(无治疗;仅放疗;仅化疗;同期放化疗;同期放化疗后序贯化疗;序贯放化疗;序贯化疗-放疗;夹心)来定义。采用 Kaplan-Meier 估计、对数秩检验和多变量 Cox 模型分析放疗和化疗的模式。
在 2870 例患者中(1798 例 EAC、606 例 SER、118 例 CC、348 例 CS),31.5%未接受辅助治疗。其余患者接受放疗或化疗单独治疗、同期放化疗、序贯或夹心治疗。在调整和未调整模型中,在联合所有组织学类型以及通过 4 臂和 8 臂比较分析按组织学分层时,辅助治疗的 OS 不同(对数秩 p<0.05,均)。按组织学类型,在调整分析中,夹心模式对子宫内膜样癌的 OS 改善最大,但两两比较未发现基于化疗的更优方案。对于浆液性和透明细胞癌,同期放化疗的 OS 改善最大,而对于癌肉瘤,单独化疗效果最好。
高级 EC 的 OS 因组织学和辅助治疗模式而异。未来的研究应根据组织学亚型和分子特征评估联合辅助治疗与单独化疗的疗效。