Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy as an Alternative Treatment Option for Patients with Cervical Cancer without Access to Radiotherapy Facilities

Background: To compare the oncological outcomes of Chinese patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stage IIIC cervical cancer (CC) receiving radical chemoradiotherapy (R-CT), abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH), or neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical surgery...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yanna Ye, Zhiqiang Li, Biliang Chen, Shan Kang, Bin Ling, Li Wang, Jilong Yao, Jinghe Lan, Ping Liu, Chunlin Chen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: IMR Press 2023-10-01
Series:Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.imrpress.com/journal/CEOG/50/10/10.31083/j.ceog5010219
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849700883674169344
author Yanna Ye
Zhiqiang Li
Biliang Chen
Shan Kang
Bin Ling
Li Wang
Jilong Yao
Jinghe Lan
Ping Liu
Chunlin Chen
author_facet Yanna Ye
Zhiqiang Li
Biliang Chen
Shan Kang
Bin Ling
Li Wang
Jilong Yao
Jinghe Lan
Ping Liu
Chunlin Chen
author_sort Yanna Ye
collection DOAJ
description Background: To compare the oncological outcomes of Chinese patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stage IIIC cervical cancer (CC) receiving radical chemoradiotherapy (R-CT), abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH), or neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical surgery (NACT). Methods: Overall, 4086 patients in 47 hospitals from 2004 to 2018 were divided into groups according to stage (4029 with stage IIIC1 and 57 with stage IIIC2). Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were applied to compare the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the three initial treatments before and after propensity score matching (PSM). Results: The 5-year DFS was worse in patients with stage IIIC2 than in those with stage IIIC1 (post-PSM: 68.3% vs. 39.9%, p < 0.001). For stage IIIC1, the ARH group had better 5-year OS (post-PSM: 71.0% vs. 80.0%, p < 0.001) and DFS (post-PSM: 67.2% vs. 71.0%, p < 0.001) than the R-CT group, while the NACT group had worse 5-year DFS (post-PSM: 67.7% vs. 55.3%, p = 0.002). The 5-year OS (post-PSM: 80.9% vs. 70.5%, p < 0.001) and DFS (post-PSM: 70.7% vs. 54.1%, p < 0.001) were better in the ARH than in the NACT group. For stage IIIC2, the 5-year DFS was better in the ARH than in the NACT group (45.4% vs. 30.1%, p = 0.025). Conclusions: The oncological prognosis of patients with stage IIIC1 CC was generally better than that of patients with stage IIIC2, thereby supporting the rationale behind the classification of stage IIIC. In less developed areas, the ARH is a promising alternative treatment option for patients with stage IIIC; nonetheless, the use of NACT is not advisable. Clinical Trial Registration: The study was registered at http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/, registration number CHiCTR1800017778.
format Article
id doaj-art-5e0ad87138b943e6a7ab5640deed31bb
institution DOAJ
issn 0390-6663
language English
publishDate 2023-10-01
publisher IMR Press
record_format Article
series Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology
spelling doaj-art-5e0ad87138b943e6a7ab5640deed31bb2025-08-20T03:18:08ZengIMR PressClinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology0390-66632023-10-01501021910.31083/j.ceog5010219S0390-6663(23)02136-XAbdominal Radical Hysterectomy as an Alternative Treatment Option for Patients with Cervical Cancer without Access to Radiotherapy FacilitiesYanna Ye0Zhiqiang Li1Biliang Chen2Shan Kang3Bin Ling4Li Wang5Jilong Yao6Jinghe Lan7Ping Liu8Chunlin Chen9Department of Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Dongguan Polytechnic, 523808 Dongguan, Guangdong, ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, 510515 Guangzhou, Guangdong, ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Xijing Hospital of Airforce Medical University, 710032 Xi'an, Shanxi, ChinaDepartment of Gynecology, Fourth Hospital, Hebei Medical University, 050019 Shijiazhuang, Hebei, ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, 100029 Beijing, ChinaDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou University, 450008 Zhengzhou, Henan, ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shenzhen Maternal and Child Health Hospital, 518028 Shenzhen, Guangdong, ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, 510515 Guangzhou, Guangdong, ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, 510515 Guangzhou, Guangdong, ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, 510515 Guangzhou, Guangdong, ChinaBackground: To compare the oncological outcomes of Chinese patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stage IIIC cervical cancer (CC) receiving radical chemoradiotherapy (R-CT), abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH), or neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical surgery (NACT). Methods: Overall, 4086 patients in 47 hospitals from 2004 to 2018 were divided into groups according to stage (4029 with stage IIIC1 and 57 with stage IIIC2). Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were applied to compare the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the three initial treatments before and after propensity score matching (PSM). Results: The 5-year DFS was worse in patients with stage IIIC2 than in those with stage IIIC1 (post-PSM: 68.3% vs. 39.9%, p < 0.001). For stage IIIC1, the ARH group had better 5-year OS (post-PSM: 71.0% vs. 80.0%, p < 0.001) and DFS (post-PSM: 67.2% vs. 71.0%, p < 0.001) than the R-CT group, while the NACT group had worse 5-year DFS (post-PSM: 67.7% vs. 55.3%, p = 0.002). The 5-year OS (post-PSM: 80.9% vs. 70.5%, p < 0.001) and DFS (post-PSM: 70.7% vs. 54.1%, p < 0.001) were better in the ARH than in the NACT group. For stage IIIC2, the 5-year DFS was better in the ARH than in the NACT group (45.4% vs. 30.1%, p = 0.025). Conclusions: The oncological prognosis of patients with stage IIIC1 CC was generally better than that of patients with stage IIIC2, thereby supporting the rationale behind the classification of stage IIIC. In less developed areas, the ARH is a promising alternative treatment option for patients with stage IIIC; nonetheless, the use of NACT is not advisable. Clinical Trial Registration: The study was registered at http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/, registration number CHiCTR1800017778.https://www.imrpress.com/journal/CEOG/50/10/10.31083/j.ceog5010219figo 2018 iiiccervical cancerradiotherapyprognosisabdominal radical hysterectomy
spellingShingle Yanna Ye
Zhiqiang Li
Biliang Chen
Shan Kang
Bin Ling
Li Wang
Jilong Yao
Jinghe Lan
Ping Liu
Chunlin Chen
Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy as an Alternative Treatment Option for Patients with Cervical Cancer without Access to Radiotherapy Facilities
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology
figo 2018 iiic
cervical cancer
radiotherapy
prognosis
abdominal radical hysterectomy
title Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy as an Alternative Treatment Option for Patients with Cervical Cancer without Access to Radiotherapy Facilities
title_full Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy as an Alternative Treatment Option for Patients with Cervical Cancer without Access to Radiotherapy Facilities
title_fullStr Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy as an Alternative Treatment Option for Patients with Cervical Cancer without Access to Radiotherapy Facilities
title_full_unstemmed Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy as an Alternative Treatment Option for Patients with Cervical Cancer without Access to Radiotherapy Facilities
title_short Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy as an Alternative Treatment Option for Patients with Cervical Cancer without Access to Radiotherapy Facilities
title_sort abdominal radical hysterectomy as an alternative treatment option for patients with cervical cancer without access to radiotherapy facilities
topic figo 2018 iiic
cervical cancer
radiotherapy
prognosis
abdominal radical hysterectomy
url https://www.imrpress.com/journal/CEOG/50/10/10.31083/j.ceog5010219
work_keys_str_mv AT yannaye abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities
AT zhiqiangli abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities
AT biliangchen abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities
AT shankang abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities
AT binling abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities
AT liwang abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities
AT jilongyao abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities
AT jinghelan abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities
AT pingliu abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities
AT chunlinchen abdominalradicalhysterectomyasanalternativetreatmentoptionforpatientswithcervicalcancerwithoutaccesstoradiotherapyfacilities