Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2019 / Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 5

Does tumor size have prognostic value in patients undergoing lymphadenectomy in endometrioid-type endometrial cancer confined to the uterine corpus?

Pages
1403–1410
Publication Date
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The 5-year DFS for patients with a tumor diameter of 35 mm (P = 0.128).Conclusion: Tumor size was not a risk factor predicting recurrence in patients with stage I or II endometrioid-type endometrial cancerwho had lymphadenectomy.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aim: We aimed to define the effect of tumor size on recurrence and survival rates in patients with stage I–II endometrioidtype endometrial cancer.Materials and methods: A total of 550 patients who had total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and pelvicparaaortic lymphadenectomy were included.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Patients with extrauterine spread, sarcomatous components, or synchronized tumor andthose who did not undergo lymphadenectomy or did not have data on tumor size were excluded.Results: The median tumor size was 35 mm (range: 3–335 mm).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The 5-year DFS for patients with a tumor diameter of 35 mm (P = 0.128).Conclusion: Tumor size was not a risk factor predicting recurrence in patients with stage I or II endometrioid-type endometrial cancerwho had lymphadenectomy.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Background/aim: We aimed to define the effect of tumor size on recurrence and survival rates in patients with stage I–II endometrioidtype endometrial cancer.Materials and methods: A total of 550 patients who had total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and pelvicparaaortic lymphadenectomy were included. Patients with extrauterine spread, sarcomatous components, or synchronized tumor andthose who did not undergo lymphadenectomy or did not have data on tumor size were excluded.Results: The median tumor size was 35 mm (range: 3–335 mm). According to the 2009 International Federation of Obstetrics andGynecology (FIGO) criteria, 245 cases were defined as stage IA, 271 as stage IB, and 34 as stage II. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS)rate was 92% and the 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) rate was 99%. The effects of prognostic factors on DFS were evaluated. Olderage, stage II disease, deep myometrial invasion, and receiving adjuvant radiotherapy were associated with decreased DFS. There was nostatistically significant association between tumor size and DFS. The 5-year DFS for patients with a tumor diameter of 35 mm (P = 0.128).Conclusion: Tumor size was not a risk factor predicting recurrence in patients with stage I or II endometrioid-type endometrial cancerwho had lymphadenectomy.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZGÜL, N., YÜCE, K., SALMAN, M. C., GÜLTEKİN, M., YÜKSEL, D., ÇAKIR, C., ÜREYEN, I., KILIÇ, İ. Ç., DURMUŞ, Y., BOYRAZ, G., KARYAL, Y. A., KARALÖK, M. A., TURAN, A. T. (2022). Does tumor size have prognostic value in patients undergoing lymphadenectomy in endometrioid-type endometrial cancer confined to the uterine corpus?. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 5, 1403–1410. https://ajindex.com/articles/610097

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (4)

  1. Parazzini F, La Vecchia C, Bocciolone L, Franceschi S. The epidemiology of endometrial cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 1991; 41 (1): 1-16
  2. Prat J, Gallardo A, Cuatrecasas M, Catasús L. Endometrial carcinoma: Pathhology and genetics. Pathology 2007; 39 (1): 72-78. doi: 10.1080/00313020601136153 3. Cresman WT, Odicino F, Mausinneuve P, Quinn MA, Beller U et al. Carcinoma of the corpus uteri. FIGO Annual Report, Vol 26. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 2006; 95 (Suppl. 1): 105-143. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7292(06)60031-60033 4. Colombo N, Preti E, Landoni F, Carinelli S, Colombo A et al. Endometrial cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Annals of Oncology 2013; 24 (Suppl. 6): vi33-38. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdt353 5. Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 2009; 105 (2): 103-104
  3. Schink JC, Lurain JR, Wallemark CB, Chmiel JS. Tumor size in endometrial cancer: a prognostic factor for lymph node metastasis. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1987; 70 (1): 216-299
  4. Al Hilli MM, Podratz KC, Dowdy SC, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Weaver AL. Preoperative biopsy and intraoperative tumor diameter predict lymph node dissemination in endometrial cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 2013; 128 (2): 294-299. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.10.009 8. Schink JC, Rademaker AW, Miller DS, Lurain JR. Tumor size in endometrial cancer. Cancer 1991; 67 (11): 2791- 2794. doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19910601)67:11 3.0.co;2-s 9. Laufer J, Scasso S, Papadia A, Sosa C, Cirillo F et al. Association between tumor diameter and lymphovascular space invasion among women with early-stage endometrial cancer. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 2013; 123 (2): 142-145. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.05.012 10. Todo Y, Watari H, Okamoto K, Hareyama H, Minobe S et al. Tumor volume successively reflects the state of disease progression in endometrial cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 2013; 129 (3): 472-477. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.02.034 11. Hellman S. Karnovsky memorial lecture. Natural history of small breast cancers. Journal Clinical of Oncology 1994; 12 (10): 2229-2234. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.10.2229 12. Mariani A, Webb MJ, Galli L, Podratz KC. Potential therapeutic role of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in node-positive endometrial cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 2000; 76 (3): 348- 356. doi: 10.1006/gyno.1999.5688 13. Gusberg SB, Jones HC Jr, Tovell HM. Selection of treatment f