1
|
Zouridis A, Kashif A, Darwish A, Pappa C, Ferrari F, Smyth SL, Sadeghi N, Sattar A, Damato S, Abdalla M, Kehoe S, Addley S, Soleymani Majd H. Challenging the Binary Classification of Endometrioid Endometrial Adenocarcinoma: The Evaluation of Grade 2 as an Independent Entity Based on Prognostic Characteristics and Recurrence Patterns. Cancers (Basel) 2025; 17:127. [PMID: 39796755 PMCID: PMC11719902 DOI: 10.3390/cancers17010127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2024] [Revised: 12/29/2024] [Accepted: 12/30/2024] [Indexed: 01/13/2025] Open
Abstract
Background: Although grade is a well-recognised prognostic factor for endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC), in more studies grade 1 (G1) and grade 2 (G2) EEC are combined and compared together with grade 3 (G3) tumours. The aim of our study is to separately investigate the outcomes, prognostic factors and recurrence patterns of G2 EEC and whether the differentiation between G1 and G2 EEC is clinically useful. Methods: we retrospectively reviewed 523 patients with EEC treated with primary surgery over a decade (March 2010-January 2020) at Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, focusing on those with G2 disease. Results: Patients with G2 EEC had worse 5-year cancer-specific survival (93.3% vs. 98.5%, p < 0.01) compared to patients with G1 EEC, but a favourable prognosis compared to G3 EEG, both in terms of disease-free survival (91.6 vs. 83.8%, p = 0.04) and cancer-specific survival (93.3% vs. 78.5%, p < 0.01). Both stage and grade are independent risk factors for cancer-specific mortality in EEC. Cervical stromal involvement, parametrial involvement and distant metastatic disease are all independent risk factors for cancer-related mortality in G2 ECC. Only 12.5% of recurrences of G2 EEC were diagnosed with examination in routine follow up in asymptomatic patients. Conclusions: our results suggest that the grading system should continue to differentiate G1 EEC and G2 EEC for better prognosis interpretation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andreas Zouridis
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK (A.D.)
| | - Ammara Kashif
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK (A.D.)
| | - Ahmed Darwish
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK (A.D.)
| | - Christina Pappa
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK (A.D.)
| | - Federico Ferrari
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, 25136 Brescia, Italy;
| | - Sarah Louise Smyth
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK (A.D.)
| | - Negin Sadeghi
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK (A.D.)
| | - Alisha Sattar
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK (A.D.)
| | - Stephen Damato
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK (A.D.)
| | - Mostafa Abdalla
- Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 9RT, UK
| | - Sean Kehoe
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK (A.D.)
| | - Susan Addley
- University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby DE22 3NE, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Matheson L, Greaves C, Duda JL, Wells M, Secher D, Rhodes P, Lorenc A, Jepson M, Ozakinci G, Watson E, Fulton-Lieuw T, Mittal S, Main B, Nankivell P, Mehanna H, Brett J. Development of the 'ACT now & check-it-out' intervention to support patient-initiated follow up for Head and Neck cancer patients. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2024; 119:108033. [PMID: 37988772 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.108033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2023] [Revised: 10/18/2023] [Accepted: 10/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/23/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Current Head and Neck cancer (HNC) follow-up models are considered sub-optimal at detecting recurrences. We describe the development of a patient-initiated follow up (PIFU) trial intervention support package, to support HNC patients to engage in PIFU self-care behaviors. METHODS An intervention mapping approach, informed by evidence synthesis, theory and stakeholder consultation, guided intervention development. Data sources included a patient survey (n = 144), patient interviews (n = 30), 7 workshops with patients (n = 25) and caregivers (n = 3) and 5 workshops with health professionals (n = 21). RESULTS The intervention ('ACT now & check-it-out') comprises an education and support session with a health professional and an app and/or a booklet for patients. The main targets for change in patient self-care behaviors were: assessing what is normal for them; regularly checking for symptom changes; prompt help-seeking for persistent/new symptoms; self-management of fear of recurrence; engaging with the intervention over time. CONCLUSIONS We have developed an evidence, person and theory-based intervention to support PIFU self-care behaviors in HNC patients. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS A trial is underway to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. If successful, this intervention could be adapted for patients with other cancers or diseases, which is important given the recent shift towards PIFU pathways.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren Matheson
- Oxford Institute of Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Research, Oxford Brookes University, OX3 0FL Oxford, UK.
| | - Colin Greaves
- School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
| | - Joan L Duda
- School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
| | - Mary Wells
- Nursing Directorate, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Charing Cross Hospital, London W6 8RF, UK.
| | | | | | - Ava Lorenc
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
| | - Marcus Jepson
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
| | - Gozde Ozakinci
- Division of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK.
| | - Eila Watson
- Oxford Institute of Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Research, Oxford Brookes University, OX3 0FL Oxford, UK.
| | - Tessa Fulton-Lieuw
- Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
| | - Saloni Mittal
- Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
| | - Barry Main
- Bristol Dental School, University of Bristol, BS1 2LY, UK.
| | - Paul Nankivell
- Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
| | - Hisham Mehanna
- Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
| | - Jo Brett
- Oxford Institute of Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Research, Oxford Brookes University, OX3 0FL Oxford, UK.
| |
Collapse
|