Just how accurate are the major risk stratification systems for early-stage endometrial cancer?

BACKGROUND

To compare the accuracy of five major risk stratification systems (RSS) in classifying the risk of recurrence and nodal metastases in early-stage endometrial cancer (EC).

METHODS

Data of 553 patients with early-stage EC were abstracted from a prospective multicentre database between January 2001 and December 2012. The following RSS were identified in a PubMed literature search and included the Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma (PORTEC-1), the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG)-99, the Survival effect of para-aortic lymphadenectomy (SEPAL), the ESMO and the ESMO-modified classifications. The accuracy of each RSS was evaluated in terms of recurrence-free survival (RFS) and nodal metastases according to discrimination.

RESULTS

Overall, the ESMO -modified RSS provided the highest discrimination for both RFS and for nodal metastases with a concordance index (C-index) of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70-0.76) and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80 (0.78-0.72), respectively. The other RSS performed as follows: the PORTEC1, GOG-99, SEPAL, ESMO classifications gave a C-index of 0.68 (0.66-0.70), 0.65 (0.63-0.67), 0.66 (0.63-0.69), 0.71 (0.68-0.74), respectively, for RFS and an AUC of 0.69 (0.66-0.72), 0.69 (0.67-0.71), 0.68 (0.66-0.70), 0.70 (0.68-0.72), respectively, for node metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the five major RSS showed high accuracy in stratifying the risk of recurrence or nodal metastases in patients with early-stage EC, although the ESMO-modified classification emerged as having the highest power of discrimination for both parameters. Therefore, there is a need to revisit existing RSS using additional tools such as biological markers to better stratify risk for these patients.

How to improve the preoperative staging of presumed early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer?

PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION

Accurate preoperative staging of early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC) is necessary to avoid under or over surgical treatment. The objective is to determine the rate of understaging and to evaluate the accuracy of different methods: hysteroscopy-curettage versus endometrial biopsy in predicting the final stage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective single-centre study led from 2000 to 2010, included women with EEC preoperatively assessed at low- or intermediate-risk. Understaging was defined as a postoperative FIGO Stage > 1 or a determination of high risk after the final histopathologic diagnosis.

RESULTS

The study included 101 women (75 low-risk and 26 intermediate-risk). Final diagnosis was upstaged for 26 of them, more frequently in the presumed intermediate-risk group (57.7% vs 14.7%, p < 0.001). The rate of preoperative understaging was higher in the women with endometrial biopsies than those with curettage (34.5% vs 15.2%, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Hysteroscopy-curettage combined with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may improve preoperative staging of early-stage EEC, especially for presumed intermediate-risk disease.