Treatment of FIGO (1971) stage I endometrial carcinoma with intensive surgery, radiotherapy and hormonotherapy according to pathological prognostic groups. Long-term results of a randomised multicentre study

Postoperative Adjuvant Treatment in Women with Stage I Endometrial Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Objective. To evaluate whether postoperative adjuvant treatment is beneficial for patient survival after surgery for early stage endometrial cancer (EC). We analyzed the outcomes of patients treated with radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or progestagen combined with other adjuvant treatments. Methods. We analyzed the outcomes of patients treated with radiotherapy alone, chemotherapy alone, or progestagen treatment with other adjuvant treatments. Women without any adjuvant treatment after operation were used as controls. We retrospectively examined disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and high-risk factors that affected the survival status of all patients who received different postoperative adjuvant therapies. Results. In all 192 patients, the total relapse and mortality rates were 5.57% and 1.68%, respectively. Fourteen patients (7.29%) developed isolated local recurrence, and 2 patients died (1.04%) of recurrence during the follow-up period. The 5-year DFS and OS rates of all patients were 95.83% and 93.75%, respectively. No significant differences were observed in the 5-year DFS, 5-year OS, OS, or DFS among the four groups of patients with FIGO stage I endometrial cancer ( $P=0.9849$ , 0.7430, 0.9754, and 0.4534, respectively). The differences in the log-rank test results of the estimates of the 5-year DFS, 5-year OS, DFS, and OS of patients with different disease stages and different ages were all significant, but no differences were observed in these parameters among patients with varying degrees of differentiation. Histologic grade, CA125 level, ER and PR status, and adjuvant therapy had no significant effect on the DFS and OS of all patients according to univariate and multivariate regression analyses, but a significant effect on DFS and OS was found when the patients were stratified by age. Conclusion. This retrospective study showed that adjuvant therapy after surgery was not significantly associated with improved DFS or OS in patients with early stage endometrial cancer. However, FIGO stage and age affected the survival of patients with stage I endometrial cancer.

Trends over time in the incidence and use of hormonal therapy in endometrial cancer: a population-based study in the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

According to current guidelines, hormonal therapy may be applied in endometrioid type endometrial cancer as an alternative to surgery for fertility preservation and in medically unfit patients. Since it is unknown how often hormonal therapy is applied, the objective of this study was to investigate trends over time in hormonal therapy use in the background of the overall incidence of endometrial cancer.

METHODS

All patients with endometrial cancer (n=48 222) registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry in the period 1989-2018 were included. European age-standardized incidence rates with corresponding estimated annual percentage change were calculated to describe trends in the incidence of endometrial cancer. The use of hormonal therapy was analyzed in the three periods 1989-1998, 1999-2008, and 2009-2018 for the following sub-groups: primary and adjuvant therapy, International Federation of Gynecology and Oncology (FIGO) stage I-II and III-IV, and by age group.

RESULTS

The European age-standardized incidence rate of endometrioid endometrial cancer peaked in 2004 with a significant increase from 1989 to 2004 (annual percentage change 0.55; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.99, p=0.020) and a subsequent decrease from 2005 to 2018 (annual percentage change -1.79; 95% CI -2.28 to -1.31, p<0.001). The incidence rate of non-endometrioid type endometrial cancer increased significantly in the study period. Hormonal therapy was used in 1482 (3.5%) patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. Among patients with FIGO stage I aged ≤40 years, hormonal therapy increased from 0% in 1989-1998 to 27% in 2009-2018. Primary hormonal treatment increased from 175 patients (5.5%) to 329 patients (7.8%) in those aged ≥75 years. Adjuvant hormonal treatment was mostly used in advanced stage endometrial cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of primary hormonal therapy in endometrioid type endometrial cancer increased over time in patients aged ≤40 years and among elderly patients. The observed trends in the current use of hormonal therapy support the need to study the effect of hormonal treatment in elderly patients and as adjuvant treatment in advanced stage endometrial cancer.

Aromatase Inhibitors as Adjuvant Treatment for ER/PgR Positive Stage I Endometrial Carcinoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Although endometrial cancer (EC) is a hormone dependent neoplasm, there are no recommendations for the determination of steroid hormone receptors in the tumor tissue and no hormone therapy has ever been assessed in the adjuvant setting. The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of adjuvant aromatase inhibitors (AIs) on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with early stage and steroid receptors-positive EC.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed clinical and pathological factors in 73 patients with high-risk (49.3%) or low-risk (50.7%) stage I (n = 71) or II (n = 2) endometrial cancer who received by their preference after counseling either no treatment (reference group) or AI. Prognostic factors were well balanced between groups. Expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR), and Ki-67 index was correlated with clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional regression analyses, adjusted for age, grade, stage, depth of myometrial invasion, lymphovascular space invasion, BMI, ER, PgR and Ki-67 labeling index levels, showed that PFS and OS had a trend to be longer in patients receiving AI than in the reference group HR= 0.23 (95% CI; 0.04-1.27) for PFS and HR= 0.11 (95% CI; 0.01-1.36) for OS.

CONCLUSION

Compared with no treatment, AI exhibited a trend toward a benefit on PFS and OS in patients with early stage hormone receptor-positive EC. Given the exploratory nature of our study, randomized clinical trials for ER/PgR positive EC patients are warranted to assess the clinical benefit of AI and the potential predictive role of steroid receptors and Ki-67.

BGCS uterine cancer guidelines: Recommendations for practice

The British Gynaecological Cancer Society has issued the first Endometrial (Uterine) Cancer guidelines as recommendation for practice for the UK.

Adjuvant treatment for endometrial cancer: literature review and recommendations by the Comité de l'évolution des pratiques en oncologie (CEPO)

OBJECTIVE

Despite the very good prognosis of endometrial cancer, a number of patients with localized disease relapse following surgery. Therefore, various adjuvant therapeutic approaches have been studied. The objective of this review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies in patients with resectable endometrial cancer and to develop evidence-based recommendations.

METHODS

A review of the scientific literature published between January 1990 and June 2012 was performed. The search was limited to published phase III clinical trials and meta-analyses evaluating the efficacy of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapies in patients with endometrial carcinoma or carcinosarcoma. A total of 23 studies and five meta-analyses were identified.

RESULTS

The selected literature showed that in patients with a low risk of recurrence, post-surgical observation is safe and recommended in most cases. There are several therapeutic modalities available for treatment of endometrial cancers with higher risk of recurrence, including vaginal brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or a combination of these.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the evidence available to date, the CEPO recommends the following: (1)post-surgical observation for most patients with a low recurrence risk; (2)adjuvant vaginal brachytherapy for patients with an intermediate recurrence risk; (3)adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy with or without vaginal brachytherapy for patients with a high recurrence risk; addition of adjuvant chemotherapy may be considered as an option for selected patients (excellent functional status, no significant co-morbidities, poor prognostic factors); (4)adjuvant chemotherapy and pelvic radiotherapy with or without brachytherapy and para-aortic irradiation for patients with advanced disease;

Adjuvant radiotherapy for stage I endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 2, 2007. The role of radiotherapy (both pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and vaginal intracavity brachytherapy (VBT)) in stage I endometrial cancer following hysterectomy remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of adjuvant radiotherapy following surgery for stage I endometrial cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Specialised Register to end-2005 for the original review, and extended the search to January 2012 for the update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared post-operative adjuvant radiotherapy (either EBRTor VBT, or both) versus no radiotherapy or VBT in women with stage I endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials and extracted data to a specifically designed data collection form. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were endometrial cancer-related deaths, locoregional recurrence and distant recurrence. Meta-analyses were performed using Cochrane Review Manager Software 5.1.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials. Seven trials (3628 women) compared EBRT with no EBRT (or VBT), and one trial (645 women) compared VBTwith no additional treatment. We considered six of the eight trials to be of a high quality. Time-to-event data were not available for all trials and all outcomes.EBRT (with or without VBT) compared with no EBRT (or VBT alone) for stage I endometrial carcinoma significantly reduced locoregional recurrence (time-to-event data: five trials, 2965 women; Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.36, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.52; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; Risk Ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.47). This reduced risk of locoregional recurrence did not translate into improved overall survival (time-to-event data: five trials, 2,965 women; HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.82 to1.20; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.15) or improved endometrial cancer-related survival (time-to-event data: five trials, 2965 women; HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.28; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.29) or improved distant recurrence rates (dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.35).EBRT did not improve survival outcomes in either the intermediate-risk or high-risk subgroups, although high-risk data were limited, and a benefit of EBRT for high-risk women could not be excluded. One trial (PORTEC-2) compared EBRT with VBT in the high-intermediate risk group and reported that VBT was effective in ensuring vaginal control with a non-significant difference in loco-regional relapse rate compared to EBRT (5.1% versus 2.1%; HR 2.08, 95% CI 0.71 to 6.09; P = 0.17). In the subgroup of low-risk patients (IA/B and grade 1/2), EBRT increased the risk of endometrial carcinoma-related deaths (including treatment-related deaths) (two trials, 517 women; RR 2.64, 95% CI 1.05 to 6.66) but there was a lack of data on overall survival. We considered the evidence for the low-risk subgroup to be of a low quality.EBRT was associated with significantly increased severe acute toxicity (two trials, 1328 patients, RR 4.68, 95% CI 1.35 to 16.16), increased severe late toxicity (six trials, 3501 women; RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.61 to 4.11) and significant reductions in quality of life scores and rectal and bladder function more than 10 years after randomisation (one trial, 351 women) compared with no EBRT.One trial of VBT versus no additional treatment in women with low-risk lesions reported a non-significant reduction in locoregional recurrence in the VBT group compared with the no additional treatment group (RR 0.39, (95% CI 0.14 to 1.09). There were no significant differences in survival outcomes in this trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

EBRT reduces the risk of locoregional recurrence but has no significant impact on cancer-related deaths or overall survival. It is associated with significant morbidity and a reduction in quality of life. There is no demonstrable survival advantage from adjuvant EBRT for high-risk stage I endometrial cancer, however, the meta-analyses of this subgroup were underpowered and also included high-intermediate risk women, therefore we cannot exclude a small benefit in the high-risk subgroup. EBRT may have an adverse effect on endometrial cancer survival when used to treat uncomplicated low-risk (IA/B grade 1/2) endometrial cancer. For the intermediate to high-intermediate risk group, VBT alone appears to be adequate in ensuring vaginal control compared to EBRT. Further research is needed to guide practice for lesions that are truly high risk. In addition, the definitions of risk should be standardised.

Adjuvant radiotherapy for stage I endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 2, 2007. The role of radiotherapy (both pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and vaginal intracavity brachytherapy (VBT)) in stage I endometrial cancer following hysterectomy remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of adjuvant radiotherapy following surgery for stage I endometrial cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Specialised Register to end-2005 for the original review, and extended the search to January 2012 for the update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared post-operative adjuvant radiotherapy (either EBRT or VBT, or both) versus no radiotherapy or VBT in women with stage I endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials and extracted data to a specifically designed data collection form. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were endometrial cancer-related deaths, locoregional recurrence and distant recurrence. Meta-analyses were performed using Cochrane Review Manager Software 5.1.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials. Seven trials (3628 women) compared EBRT with no EBRT (or VBT), and one trial (645 women) compared VBT with no additional treatment. We considered six of the eight trials to be of a high quality. Time-to-event data were not available for all trials and all outcomes.EBRT (with or without VBT) compared with no EBRT (or VBT alone) for stage I endometrial carcinoma significantly reduced locoregional recurrence (time-to-event data: five trials, 2965 women; Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.36, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.52; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; Risk Ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.47). This reduced risk of locoregional recurrence did not translate into improved overall survival (time-to-event data: five trials, 2,965 women; HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.20; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.15) or improved endometrial cancer-related survival (time-to-event data: five trials, 2965 women; HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.28; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.29) or improved distant recurrence rates (dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80 to1.35).EBRT did not improve survival outcomes in either the intermediate-risk or high-risk subgroups, although high-risk data were limited, and a benefit of EBRT for high-risk women could not be excluded. In the subgroup of low-risk patients (IA/B and grade 1/2), EBRT increased the risk of endometrial carcinoma-related deaths (including treatment-related deaths) (two trials, 517 women; RR 2.64, 95% CI 1.05 to 6.66) but there was a lack of data on overall survival. We considered the evidence for the low-risk subgroup to be of a low quality.EBRT was associated with significantly increased severe acute toxicity (two trials, 1328 patients, RR 4.68, 95% CI 1.35 to 16.16), increased severe late toxicity (six trials, 3501 women; RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.61 to 4.11) and significant reductions in quality of life scores and rectal and bladder function more than 10 years after randomisation (one trial, 351 women) compared with no EBRT.One trial of VBT versus no additional treatment in women with low-risk lesions reported a non-significant reduction in locoregional recurrence in the VBT group compared with the no additional treatment group (RR 0.39, (95% CI 0.14 to 1.09). There were no significant differences in survival outcomes in this trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

EBRT reduces the risk of locoregional recurrence but has no significant impact on cancer-related deaths or overall survival. It is associated with significant morbidity and a reduction in quality of life, and bladder and rectal function. EBRT may have an adverse effect on endometrial cancer survival when used to treat uncomplicated low-risk (IA/B grade 1/2) endometrial cancer. There is no demonstrable survival advantage from adjuvant EBRT for high-risk stage I endometrial cancer, however, the meta-analyses of this subgroup were underpowered and also included high-intermediate risk women. Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimates of effects and may change the estimates. Therefore, whilst there appears to be no survival benefit in the routine use of EBRT in women with stage I endometrial cancer, we cannot exclude a benefit in high-risk women. VBT is potentially useful in intermediate-risk and high-risk subgroups but evidence from further RCTs is needed. In addition, the definitions of risk should be standardised.

Adjuvant progestagens for endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

Endometrial cancer is the most common genital tract carcinoma among women in developed countries, with most women presenting with stage 1 disease. Adjuvant progestagen therapy has been advocated following primary surgery to reduce the risk of recurrence of disease.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of adjuvant progestagen therapy for the treatment of endometrial cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Specilaised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 2, 2009. MEDLINE and EMBASE up to April 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of progestagen therapy in women who have had surgery for endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. Risk ratios (RRs) comparing survival in women who did and did not receive progestagen were pooled in random effects meta-analyses. .

MAIN RESULTS

Seven trials assessing 4556 women were identified. Three trials included women with stage one disease only, whereas four included women with more advanced disease. Meta-analysis of four trials showed that there was no significant difference in the risk of death at five years between adjuvant progestagen therapy and no further treatment (RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.18). This conclusion is also robust to single trial analyses at 4 and 7 years and in one trial across all points in time using a hazard ratio (HR). There was also no significant difference between progestagen therapy and control in terms of the risk of death from endometrial cancer, cardiovascular disease and intercurrent disease. Relapse of disease appeared to be reduced by progestagen therapy in one trial (HR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.97 and 5 year RR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96), but there was no evidence of a difference in disease recurrence in another trial at 7 years (RR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.27).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to support the use of adjuvant progestagen therapy in the primary treatment of endometrial cancer.

Adjuvant hormonal therapy for stage I endometrial cancer

Question

What is the role of hormonal therapy as adjuvant therapy in patients with stage i endometrial cancer?

Perspectives

There is little consensus on the role of adjuvant treatment for patients with stage i endometrial cancer. Although the use of hormonal therapy has been established in advanced disease, less agreement has emerged concerning the benefits of adjuvant hormonal therapy for patients with early-stage disease. The objective of the present evidence series was to review the existing literature on the role of hormonal therapy as adjuvant therapy in patients with stage i endometrial cancer.

Outcomes

Reports were sought that included at least one of the following outcomes: overall survival, disease-free survival, recurrence (local, or distant, or both), adverse effects, and quality of life. Because of the potential for long-term adverse effects with adjuvant hormonal treatment in this patient population, especially with regard to thromboembolic or cardiovascular events, the rates of non-cancer-related death were also of interest.

Methodology

The medline, embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials, practice guidelines, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. The resulting evidence informed the development of the clinical practice guideline. The systematic review with meta-analyses and practice guideline were approved by the Report Approval Panel of the Program in Evidence-Based Care, and by the Gynecology Cancer Disease Site Group (dsg).

Results

Nine randomized trials and one published meta-analysis comparing adjuvant hormonal therapy with no adjuvant therapy in women with stage i endometrial cancer constituted the evidence base. One trial reported a statistically significant survival benefit with adjuvant progestogen as compared with no further treatment (97% vs. 69%, p < 0.001). In that trial, the treatment group had a higher number of patients with less myometrial invasion, and a lower number of patients with advanced-stage disease. These differences in baseline characteristics between the randomized groups were considered to be clinically important. In addition, the results of that trial were not consistent with those of other trials, and the trial was a source of statistical heterogeneity when data were pooled across trials.

In two of the nine randomized trials, statistically significant recurrence-free benefits were detected with adjuvant hormonal therapy as compared with no further therapy. In one trial, the difference between the rates of recurrence was 16%; however, the methodologic concerns related to that that trial limited its relevance. In the other trial, the difference between the rates of recurrence was 5%. In that trial, patients were at a high risk of recurrence. None of the remaining seven randomized trials reported any significant difference in recurrence rates between treatment groups.

The meta-analysis identified in the literature detected no statistically significant recurrence-free or overall survival benefit associated with adjuvant hormonal therapy as compared with no adjuvant therapy [odds ratio (or): 1.05; 95% confidence interval (ci): 0.88 to 1.24). Those results are consistent with the results of the meta-analysis in the present report, which included an additional two trials (or: 1.10; 95% ci: 0.91 to 1.34).

Practice Guideline

Molecular target therapies in endometrial cancer: from the basic research to the clinic

Molecular targeted therapies represent an interesting field of pharmacological research in endometrial cancer. The loss of PTEN (phosphatase and tensin homolog deleted on chromosome 10) function, with consequent activation of the PI3K (phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase)-AKT (serine/threonine-specific protein kinase)-mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) signaling pathway, occurs in 32-83% of endometrioid-type endometrial carcinomas, thus suggesting a role for mTOR inhibition in this malignancy. Some analogues of rapamycin (CCI-799, RAD-001, AP-23573) have been developed and tested in different tumors including endometrioid-type endometrial carcinoma. For example, AP-23573 achieved a clinical benefit response in 33% of 27 heavily pretreated patients, and CCI-799 obtained a 26% partial response rate and a 63% stable disease rate in 19 patients. Overexpression of ErbB-2 (epidermal growth factor type II receptor) has been detected in 18-80% of uterine papillary serous carcinomas (UPSCs), thus providing a biological rationale for the use of trastuzumab in these aggressive tumors. UPSC often overexpresses claudin-3 and claudin-4, which represent the epithelial receptors for Clostridium perfringens enterotoxin (CPE). CPE-mediated therapy might be a novel treatment modality for UPSC resistant to chemotherapy. A better understanding of the signaling transduction pathways that are dysregulated in endometrioid-type endometrial carcinoma and UPSC will allow the development of novel molecular targeted therapies.

The role of postoperative radiotherapy in carcinoma of the endometrium

The role of adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy in endometrial carcinoma after surgery remains controversial. There is a great variation between centres in deciding when to give postoperative external beam radiotherapy and/or vaginal vault brachytherapy for patients with endometrial carcinoma. The role of pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy as well as the need for postoperative radiotherapy after this type of surgical staging continue to be debated. Furthermore, the role of adjuvant chemotherapy either alone or in combination with adjuvant radiotherapy also remains to be determined. This overview discusses the role of postoperative radiotherapy in the context of surgery and other adjuvant treatments in carcinoma of the endometrium.

Adjuvant radiotherapy for stage I endometrial cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

The role of adjuvant radiotherapy in stage I endometrial cancer following surgery remains unclear. The management for these patients varies widely, particularly in stage I patients with different risk factors. Using the methodology of Cochrane Collaboration, we did a systematic and meta-analysis of all know randomised controlled trials which compared adjuvant radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy following surgery for patients with stage I endometrial cancer. The meta-analysis was carried out on four trials (three published and one unpublished) and a total of 1770 patients. The addition of pelvic external beam radiotherapy to surgery reduced locoregional recurrence, a relative risk (RR) of 0.28 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17-0.44, P < 0.00001], which is a 72% reduction in the risk of pelvic relapse (95% CI 56% to 83%) and an absolute risk reduction of 6% (95% CI of 4% to 8%). The reduction in the risk of locoregional recurrence did not translate into a reduction in the risks of death from all causes, endometrial cancer death or distant recurrence. A subgroup analysis showed a trend towards the reduction in the risks of death from all causes and endometrial cancer in patients with multiple high risk factors (including stage 1c and grade 3). External beam pelvic radiotherapy should be considered in patients with multiple high-risk features including stage 1c and grade 3. However, it carries an inherent risk of damage and toxicity and should be avoided in stage 1 endometrial cancer patients with no high risk factors.

Adjuvant therapy for early-stage endometrial cancer: a review

Most patients with endometrial cancer (EMC) present their symptoms early in their course, leading to an overall favorable outcome. However, some patients who are in early-stage diseases may carry some risk features that would hamper their prognoses. For these early-stage diseases with high risk of recurrences, radiation therapy certainly plays a major role as an adjuvant treatment. Despite an excellent local diseases control by radiation, systemic failures are still encountered. To improve the prognoses, other types of adjuvant therapy have been attempted. In this review, various options of adjuvant treatment for this early-stage EMC including radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy are discussed.

Adjuvant radiotherapy for stage I endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of adjuvant radiotherapy (both pelvic external beam radiotherapy and vaginal intracavity brachytherapy) in stage I endometrial cancer following total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (TAH and BSO) remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of adjuvant radiotherapy following surgery for stage I endometrial cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CancerLit, Physician Data Query (PDQ) of National Cancer Institute. Handsearching was also carried out where appropriate.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared adjuvant radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy following surgery for patients with stage I endometrial cancer were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Quality of the studies was assessed and data collected using a predefined data collection form. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were locoregional recurrence, distant recurrence and endometrial cancer death. Data on quality of life (QOL) and morbidity were also collected. A meta-analysis on included trials was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager Software 4.2.

MAIN RESULTS

The meta-analysis was performed on four trials (1770 patients). The addition of pelvic external beam radiotherapy to surgery reduced locoregional recurrence, a relative risk (RR) of 0.28 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.44, p < 0.00001), which is a 72% reduction in the risk of pelvic relapse (95% CI 56% to 83%) and an absolute risk reduction of 6% (95% CI of 4 to 8%). The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one locoregional recurrence is 16.7 patients (95% CI 12.5 to 25). The reduction in the risk of locoregional recurrence did not translate into either a reduction in the risk of distant recurrence or death from all causes or endometrial cancer death. A subgroup analysis of women with multiple high risk factors (including stage 1c and grade 3) showed a trend toward the reduction in the risk of death from all causes and endometrial cancer death in patients who underwent adjuvant external beam radiotherapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Patients with stage I endometrial carcinoma have different risks of local and distant recurrence depending on the presence of risk factors including stage 1c, grade 3, lymphovascular space invasion and age. Though external beam pelvic radiotherapy reduced locoregional recurrence by 72%, there is no evidence to suggest that it reduced the risk of death. In patients with multiple high risk factors, including stage 1c and grade 3, there was a trend towards a survival benefit and adjuvant external beam radiotherapy may be justified. For patients with only one risk factor, grade 3 or stage 1c, no definite conclusion can be made and data from ongoing studies ( ASTEC; Lukka) are awaited. External beam radiotherapy carries a risk of toxicity and should be avoided in stage 1 endometrial cancer patients with no high risk factors.

Adenocarcinoma of the endometrium treated with combined irradiation and surgery: study of 437 patients

PURPOSE

To identify prognostic factors and treatment toxicity in a series of operable endometrial adenocarcinomas.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between November 1971 and October 1992, 437 patients (pts) with endometrial carcinoma, staged according to the 1988 FIGO staging system (225 Stage IB, 107 Stage IC, 4 Stage IIA, 35 Stage IIB, 30 Stage IIIA, 6 Stage IIIB, and 30 Stage IIIC), underwent total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy without (n = 140) or with (n = 297) pelvic lymph node dissection. The chronology of adjuvant RT was not randomized and depended on the usual practices of the surgical teams. Seventy-nine pts (Group I) received preoperative low-dose-rate uterovaginal brachytherapy (mean dose [MD]: 57 Gy). Three hundred fifty-eight pts (Group II) received postoperative RT. One hundred ninety-six pts received low-dose-rate vaginal brachytherapy alone (MD: 50 Gy). One hundred fifty-eight pts had external beam pelvic RT (MD: 46 Gy) followed by low-dose-rate vaginal brachytherapy (MD: 17 Gy). Four pts had external beam pelvic RT alone (MD: 47 Gy). The mean follow-up from the beginning of treatment was 128 months.

RESULTS

The 10-year disease-free survival rate was 86%. From 57 recurrences, only 12 were isolated locoregional recurrences. The independent factors decreasing the probability of disease-free survival were as follows: histologic type (clear-cell carcinoma, p = 0.038), largest histologic tumor diameter >3 cm (p = 0.015), histologic grade (p = 0.008), myometrial invasion > 1/2 (p = 0.005), and 1988 FIGO staging system (p = 9.10(-8)). In Group II, the addition of external beam pelvic RT did not seem to independently improve vaginal or pelvic control. The postoperative complication rate was 7%. The independent factors increasing the risk of postoperative complications were stage FIGO (p = 0.02) and pelvic lymph node dissection (p = 0.011). The 10-year rate for Grade 3 and 4 late radiation complications according to the LENT-SOMA scoring system was 3.1%. External beam pelvic RT independently increased the rate for Grade 3 and 4 late complication (RR: 5.6, p = 0.0096).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative external beam pelvic RT increases the risk of late radiation complications. After surgical and histopathologic staging with pelvic lymph node dissection, in subgroup of "intermediate-risk" patients (Stage IA Grade 3, IB-C and II), postoperative vaginal brachytherapy alone is probably sufficient to obtain a good therapeutic index. Results for patients with Stage III tumor are not satisfactory.

Postoperative irradiation in endometrial cancer: still a matter of controversy

Although endometrial cancer is the most common female malignancy, evidence-based uniform guidelines for postoperative therapy have not been established. The most logical management is adjuvant irradiation tailored to the extent of surgery, the tumour grade, depth of myometrial invasion, degree of lymph node involvement and age of the patient. Currently, the only widely accepted treatment recommendations are no further therapy in low-risk patients who underwent extensive surgical staging, and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in high-risk patients. Most authors recommend postoperative application of only one radiotherapy modality: either brachytherapy (BRT) or EBRT, as their routine combination does not clearly improve the outcome but does increase the risk of late complications. A combination of BRT and EBRT should however be considered in patients with stage II disease, for infiltration of the lower uterine segment, vaginal involvement, positive or close surgical margins, capillary space involvement or unfavourable histology. Two recent randomized studies including mostly intermediate-risk patients managed with either extensive surgical staging or total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (TAH&BSO) with or without postoperative EBRT, showed better local control but no survival benefit from adjuvant irradiation. Two ongoing Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) studies compare adjuvant chemotherapy with pelvic or abdominal irradiation in patients with high risk of local relapse. The role of adjuvant radiotherapy (EBRT with or without BRT) in high-risk patients as well as the value of lymphadenectomy in patients fit for such surgery is being addressed in a trial co-ordinated by the Medical Research Council. Future studies are warranted to define whether any irradiation should be employed in intermediate-risk patients and which radiotherapy modality should be used in high-risk node-negative patients with stage I tumours (stage Ib grade 3 and all stage Ic). Other issues which should be addressed in future studies include the extent of surgery, the role of systemic therapies, the relevance of novel biologic prognostic factors, salvage therapies after recurrence, cost-benefit analysis and quality of life.

Ultrasonographic detection of asymptomatic endometrial cancer in postmenopausal patients offers no prognostic advantage over symptomatic disease discovered by uterine bleeding

The aim of this study was to investigate whether endometrial carcinoma (EC) screening by transvaginal sonography (TVS) has a prognostic advantage over symptomatic EC. In a retrospective study, 190 postmenopausal patients with symptomatic EC and 123 asymptomatic patients with suspicious endometrium detected by TVS were analysed regarding clinical, socio-economic and histopathological findings. Total bleeding time and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) tumour stage were evaluated with respect to their effect on survival. In 123 asymptomatic patients with suspicious endometrium, 16 (13%) EC, 61 (50%) polyps, 21 (17%) hyperplasias, 23 (19%) atrophias, 1 (0.8%) myoma and 1 (0.8%) metastasis were found. TVS findings in asymptomatic patients resulted in unnecessary operations, which were associated with considerable costs totalling at least 116256. Compared with screened asymptomatic patients, symptomatic patients were significantly (P<0.05) older, more frequently obese, and hypertensive, had a larger proportion of cases living in rural areas and visited their gynaecologists rarely. The bleeding time of symptomatic patients strongly correlated with the tumour stage (P<0.0001). Depending on the bleeding time, the 5-year disease-free survival and overall survival rates were 77% and 86% (no bleeding), 83% and 98% (<8 weeks), 74% and 90% (8-16 weeks), and 62% and 69% (>16 weeks), respectively. The corresponding tumour stage-related data for disease-free and overall survival were 100% (Ia; both rates), 87% and 95% (Ib), 66% and 93% (Ic), 63% and 78% (II) and 36% (III/IV; both rates), respectively. Postmenopausal vaginal bleeding represents an early symptom of EC, but it is not always perceived as problematic by the patients. There is no prognostic advantage for screened compared with symptomatic patients, who had bleeding of shorter than 8 weeks. Moreover, patients who are at a high risk for EC tend to avoid TVS screening. Finally, endometrial screening often results in unnecessary operations, which are associated with increased morbidity and costs.

Progestagens for endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVES

Progestagen therapy following primary surgery for endometrial cancer has been advocated to reduce the risk of recurrence. The objective of this review was to assess the effect of adjuvant progestagen therapy in endometrial cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group trials register and MEDLINE up to May 1999.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of progestagen therapy in women who have had surgery for endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality was assessed and two reviewers abstracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Six trials involving 4351 women were identified. Three trials included women with stage one disease only, whereas three included women with more advanced disease. Based on five trials, overall survival was not improved by adjuvant progestagen therapy (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.24). Endometrial cancer deaths and relapse of disease appears to be reduced by progestagen therapy OR 0.88 95% CI (0.71-1.1) and 0. 81 95% CI (0.65-1.01) respectively. However, non-endometrial cancer related deaths were more common in women treated with progestagens OR 1.33 (1.02-1.73).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence does not support the use of adjuvant progestagen therapy in the primary treatment of endometrial cancer.

Surgery followed by radiotherapy in endometrial cancer: analysis of survival and patterns of failure

We performed a retrospective evaluation of survival and patterns of failure in 317 consecutive endometrial cancer patients treated between 1974 and 1991 with surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy. Two hundred and forty seven patients (78%) had FIGO stage I disease, 30 (9%) - stage II, 35 (11%) - stage III and 5 (2%) - stage IV. Both low dose rate brachytherapy (BRT) and external beam radiation (EBRT) were applied in 247 patients (78%), only BRT in 49 (15%), and only EBRT in 21 (7%). Median follow-up was 7.3 years. Five-year overall survival was 75%, and five-year disease free survival was 81%. Both overall and disease free survival rates were correlated with stage (P = 0.001 and P = 0.000, respectively). Recurrence occurred in 70 patients (22%): 11 (3.5%) in the pelvis, 51 (16%) outside the pelvis and 6 (2%) both in- and outside the pelvis. Independent risk factors for local recurrence included older age (P = 0.03) and variant histologic subtypes (P = 0.039), whereas independent risk factors for distant spread were stage (P = 0.000) and older age (P = 0.011). Normalized Total Dose (the sum of EBRT and BRT doses, based on linear-quadratic equation), type of radiotherapy regimen, overall radiotherapy time and surgery-to-radiotherapy interval did not correlate with the risk of relapse. Severe early and late radiotherapy complications were observed in 21 (7%) and 35 patients (11%), respectively. In view of the relatively low risk of exclusive pelvic recurrences and the high rate of severe late radiotherapy complications, indications for postoperative radiotherapy and its scheme should be verified. A relatively high rate of extrapelvic recurrences calls for effective systemic adjuvants to surgery. Further definition of high risk patients is warranted in order to tailor postoperative therapy to the prognostic factors and to increase the therapeutic index of management of endometrial cancer.

Adjuvant vaginal high-dose-rate afterloading alone in endometrial carcinoma: patterns of relapse and side effects following low-dose therapy

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study was conducted to document the incidence and location of recurrences as well as the rate of side effects following low-dose postoperative high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy in patients with endometrial carcinoma.

METHODS

From 1987 to 1993, 122 patients with moderate-risk (78) and high-risk (44) endometrial carcinoma underwent adjuvant vaginal irradiation. All patients received three fractions of 7 Gy specified on the surface of the vaginal cylinder.

RESULTS

Relapses occurred in 12 (9. 8%) patients on average after 25.6 months. Seven (5.7%) patients had a sole pelvic recurrence; in 2 (1.6%) of those the relapse was located in the vagina only. Three (2.5%) patients had a pelvic relapse combined with distant metastases. Distant metastases alone were diagnosed in 2 (1.6%) patients. A tumor recurrence was diagnosed in 3 of 78 (3.8%) patients with moderate-risk disease and in 9 of 44 (20.5%) patients with high-risk disease. The estimated 5-year relapse-free survival was 94% for patients with moderate-risk and 74% for patients with high-risk tumors (P = 0.004). Neither severe nor chronic complications were noted.

CONCLUSION

Even low doses of HDR brachytherapy seem sufficient for excellent vaginal disease control in moderate-risk disease. In advanced tumors combined radiation therapy is warranted for improved pelvic disease control.

An analysis of approaches to the management of endometrial cancer in North America: a CTF study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to define the clinical-therapeutical approach to endometrial cancer now being followed in some of the most important centers of reference for gynecological cancer in North America by means of a questionnaire.

STUDY DESIGN

The questionnaire focused on four principal areas: (1) surgical staging and therapy; (2) adjuvant treatment; (3) treatment modifications; and (4) management of advanced stages (FIGO III-IV).

RESULTS

There were 48 evaluable responses (77%) received by the end of December 1994 which were considered for this analysis. Lymphadenectomy is utilized routinely in 26/48 centers (54.2%) and in selective clinical-pathological conditions in another 21/48 centers (43.5%). In the majority of centers (31/48; 64.6%) radical surgery is utilized for selected indications such as cervical involvement. Only 3/48 (6.2%) centers consider the vaginal approach totally inappropriate. The great majority (40/48; 83.3%) of the centers considered postsurgical adjuvant therapy to be necessary in FIGO Stage Ic. Brachytherapy is routinely performed in 3 centers (6.2%) in postsurgical management of Stage I endometrial cancer, while the majority of the centers (31/48; 64.6%) perform brachytherapy of the vaginal vault in certain clinical-pathological conditions. A wide variety of treatments are used for advanced stages (FIGO III-IV).

CONCLUSIONS

It emerges that some controversial aspects exist on endometrial cancer treatment, and these conflicting data need a large-scale multicenter randomized clinical trial.

An analysis of approaches to the treatment of endometrial cancer in western Europe: a CTF study

The role of this research is to define the clinical-therapeutic approach to endometrial cancer currently being followed in some of the most important centres of reference for gynaecological cancer in Western Europe. Data was collected by means of a questionnaire, concerning specific diagnostic and therapeutic options, sent to 115 leading centres for gynaecological oncology in Western Europe, and 82 responses were received. The analysis of the management of this neoplasia in Western European countries shows significant differences regarding some particular clinical conditions. Only 24.4% of the interviewed centres stated that they perform lymphadenectomy routinely, whereas it is most commonly reserved for specific pathological conditions. The presence of lymph node spread is generally considered to be the most important prognostic element, and currently, radiotherapy of the pelvis appears to be the treatment of choice either as the sole postsurgical therapy (57%) or in combination with systemic treatment. An adjuvant treatment in stage I lymph node-negative patients is adopted in the large majority of the centres (70.5%) when poorly differentiated cancer (46%) and/or deep myometrial invasion (33.3%) are present. In this condition, radiotherapy appears to be the therapy of choice. Histotype and grading are generally recognised as important risk factors and result in treatment modification; the high percentage of primary surgical modifications is considerable (63.4%) in stage I grade 3 cancers that primarily require lymphadenectomy or recourse to radical hysterectomy. The results of our study indicate that there is no leading therapy in the advanced stages of endometrial cancers, but each therapeutic modality is adopted to more or less the same extent.