| Home | E-Submission | Sitemap | Contact Us |  
top_img
Radiation Oncology Journal > Volume 40(2); 2022 > Article
Abakay, Arslan, Kurt, and Cetintas: Improving locoregional outcome in high-intermediate-risk and high-risk stage I endometrial cancer with surgical staging followed by brachytherapy

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to assess the locoregional efficacy of postoperative vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) alone in patients undergoing surgical staging for early-stage high-intermediate-risk (HIR) and high-risk (HR) endometrial cancer.

Materials and Methods

One hundred and four patients with early-stage HIR and HR endometrial cancer who underwent surgical staging were treated with adjuvant VBT alone. The patients with stage Ib, grade I–III, stage Ia, grade III, lower uterine segment involvement, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were included to study.

Results

The 5- and 10-year overall survival (OS) rates were 87% and 76%, respectively. The 5- and 10-year DFS rates were 86% and 86%, respectively. Among the patients, 92% had endometrioid adenocarcinoma, 2% had undifferentiated carcinoma, 2% had serous papillary carcinoma, and 4% had clear-cell carcinoma. Of the patients, 63% had stage Ib disease, while 37% had stage Ia disease. None of the patients had vaginal or pelvic lymph node recurrence, whereas two had para-aortic lymph node metastasis, one had surgical scar recurrence, one had para-aortic lymph node and brain metastasis, and one had lung metastasis. The presence of lymphatic invasion was found to be a statistically significant prognostic factor for increased distant metastasis rates (p = 0.020). Lymphatic invasion was also regarded as an independent prognostic factor for metastasis-free survival (p = 0.044).

Conclusion

Our study results suggest that postoperative VBT alone is an effective and safe treatment modality with low complication in patients undergoing surgical staging for HIR and HR endometrial cancer.

Introduction

Endometrial adenocarcinoma is the most common gynecologic malignancy with the lowest mortality rates [1,2]. About 75% of cases with endometrial cancer are diagnosed with early-stage disease which is confined to the uterus [3]. The treatment of stage I disease is based on total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO), and lymph node dissection and/or postoperative external radiation therapy (PORT). Five-year survival for stage I patients is between 80%–90% with a locoregional recurrence rate of 4% to 8% [4-6]. The prognosis is extremely good in stage I disease [7-10], whereas the recurrence rate may vary between 5% and 16% depending on tumor localization, depth of invasion, and pelvic lymph node metastasis and grade [11-14]. Several retrospective and prospective studies have shown that PORT reduces locoregional recurrence but has no impact on overall survival (OS) [15]. However, adjuvant PORT utilization in the treatment of early-stage disease is controversial due to treatment related side effects including diarrhea, intestinal obstruction, and lymphedema [8,10].
Radical hysterectomy bilateral oophorectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy was considered to be the standard treatment of endometrial cancer [14,16-18]. In case of poor prognostic factors adjuvant treatment options are considered. Prospective, randomized PORTEC-1 (Postoperative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma trial) study was conducted to compare the efficacy of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy versus no treatment. At 15 years, locoregional recurrence rate was reported as 5.8% in external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) arm and 15.5% in follow-up arm (p < 0.001). In this trial, since the authors reported that vagina was the most frequent site of recurrence in 75% patients undergoing surgery alone [19], they concluded that vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) alone is effective treatment to obtain vaginal control avoiding PORT-related complications [20-25].
In this study, we have assessed the results of postoperative VBT in surgically staged stage I endometrial cancer patients and analysed recurrence patterns and prognostic parameters in high-intermediate-risk and high-risk group patients.

Materials and Methods

A total of 104 patients who underwent postoperative adjuvant VBT for stage I endometrial cancer were retrospectively analyzed between the years 2000 and 2015. A written informed consent was obtained from each patient. The study was conducted according to the principles of the Helsinki Declaration and approval was granted by the institutional Ethics Committee. All patients provided signed informed consent for treatment, and this study was approved by our Institutional Review Board of Uludag University Faculty of Medicine (No. 2008-21/34).
At baseline, all patients were evaluated based on medical history, physical examination findings, laboratory test results, chest X-ray and abdominopelvic tomography scans. Acute and chronic side effects were classified according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria. According to the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system, all the patients had been re-staged and the patients with stage Ib, grade I–III, stage Ia, grade III, lower uterine segment involvement, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were included.
All patients who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy plus bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy within bilateral pelvic node dissection with or without para-aortic dissection were included. Para-aortic lymph node dissection was performed in all except six patients. The patients with high grade histology were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy in addition to VBT.

1. Brachytherapy

High-dose-rate (HDR) afterloading 192Ir (iridium-192) VBT system (GammaMed 12i; Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA) was delivered to 0.5 cm depth of the vaginal wall. While two-dimensional (2D) technique was used until 2011, image-guided 3D brachytherapy was used after the year of 2011. The median diameter of the cylinder was 3 cm (range, 2.3 to 3.5 cm). The mean length for target volume was 3.8 cm. One patient received VBT at a dose of 8 Gy in 3 fractions (total 24 Gy), one patient at a dose of 6 Gy in 4 fractions (total 24 Gy), whereas the remaining patients received VBT at a dose of 7 Gy in 3 fractions (21 Gy). The median rectal dose was 16.1 Gy (range, 10.3 to 23.8 Gy), while the mean bladder dose was 13 Gy (range, 5.42 to 19.4 Gy).

2. Statistical analysis

OS was defined as the time from the diagnosis to the last follow-up visit. Disease-free survival (DFS) was defined as the time from surgery to the development of distant organ or para-aortic lymph node metastasis or local recurrence. Metastasis-free survival was defined as the time from surgery to the occurrence of first metastases.
Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier survival curves. The log-rank test was used to compare survival rates. Descriptive data were expressed in mean±standard deviation. A p-value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Independent prognostic factors were determined by multivariate Cox regression analysis using a forward stepwise selection.

Results

The mean follow-up was 48.5 months (range, 2 to 130 months). At the time of analysis, two patients died from second primary tumors, four patients from a distant metastasis, and six from an unknown cause. The 5- and 10-year OS rates were 87% and 76%, respectively. The 5- and 10-year DFS rates were 86% and 86%, respectively.
The mean age was 62.5 years (range, 46 to 81 years). The cut-off value of age was 65 years. Thirty-two patients (61%) were under 65 at the time of diagnosis. The mean tumor size was 3.7 cm. The time between surgery and VBT was 41 days (range, 9 to 120 days). Tumor characteristics are shown in Table 1. Serous papillary, undifferentiated and clear-cell carcinomas were classified as high-grade tumors and all the patients with type 2 histology (8%) also received adjuvant chemotherapy.
During the follow-up, distant recurrences occurred more frequently than locoregional recurrences. Four patients had paraaortic lymph node metastasis (one patient, stage Ia grade 1; two, stage Ia grade 3; and one, stage Ib grade 3), one had drain site recurrence (stage Ib grade 1), two had para-aortic lymph node and brain metastasis (one patient, stage Ib grade 1; one, stage Ib grade 3) at the same time, and two had lung metastasis (one patient, stage Ib grade 3; one, stage Ia grade 3). There were two patients observed with solid organ metastasis in type 2 histology. LVI was the only predominant prognostic parameter of all. Two out of four patients with para-aortic lymph node metastasis underwent para-aortic radiation therapy and chemotherapy, two of them treated with surgery followed by radiotherapy. All the patients with distant metastasis received chemotherapy except one due to patient’s rejection. Although the number of stage Ib grade 3 patients is low, none of them had vaginal or pelvic lymph node recurrence during the follow-up.
In the analysis, OS rate was significantly higher in patients in whom more than 20 lymph nodes were dissected (p = 0.033). OS rate tended to be lower in patients with LVI (p = 0.088) but it was not found to be significant. In univariate log-rank analysis, presence of LVI was found to be a statistically significant prognostic factor for increased distant metastasis rates (p = 0.020) in Table 2.
Ten-year DFS rates were 69% and 92% in patients with and without LVI, respectively. In multivariate analysis consisting the variables; LVI, the depth of myometrial invasion, disease grade, tumor histology, and age, only LVI found to be an independent prognostic factor for DFS (p = 0.044) (Table 3). The number of pelvic lymph nodes (<20 and >20) and para-aortic lymph nodes (<5 and ≥5), and time from surgery to VBT (<45 days and ≥45 days) were not associated with DFS (p = 0.714, p = 0.610, and p = 0.966, respectively).
Neither univariate nor multivariate analysis age, tumor histology, stage and grade, depth of invasion, the ratio of invasion, estrogen and progesterone receptors, lower uterine segment involvement, the presence of squamous differentiation, the number of para-aortic lymph nodes dissected, duration between surgery and VBT, and a second primary tumor presence were not found associated with improved OS rates.
Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed that there was no relationship between OS and prognostic factors such as LVI, myometrial invasion, the number of dissected lymph nodes and grade. Metastasis was only found as a poor prognostic factor for OS (p = 0.017) (Table 4).
As the long-term side effects, we encountered that 16 patients (15%) had grade I vaginal mucositis, while 50 patients (48%) had cystitis and grade I dysuria. None of the patients had grade II–III vaginal mucositis and cystitis.

Discussion and Conclusion

Most patients diagnosed with early-stage endometrial cancer are treated with surgery alone and have low risk of recurrence. This risk is significantly higher for some women with high-risk factors which is required adjuvan radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy. EBRT improves both local and regional control, but does not reduce the risk of death and also associated with increasing side effects [26-29]. Even in advances in radiotherapy techniques and image guided treatment, PORT following surgery has been reported to increase the incidence of genitourinary, and gastrointestinal side effects compared with brachytherapy alone [30,31].
In the Gynecological Oncology Group 99 (GOG-99) study, adjuvant therapy indication following definite surgical staging was identified based on the definitions of intermediate and high-risk patient groups. The patients at ≥70 years of age with any risk factor (grade II–III, the presence of LVI, outer third myometrial invasion), those at ≥50 years of age with at least two risk factors, and those at any age with three risk factors were randomized to either adjuvant pelvic PORT or observation. The study results demonstrated adjuvant PORT decreased the risk of pelvic or vaginal recurrence compared to the observation arm; however, there was no statistically significant difference in survival between the groups [10,32]. Similarly, in the PORTEC-I study, a total of 714 patients were divided into two groups: (1) TAH + BSO followed by adjuvant PRT; (2) observation arm. PORT substantially decreased locoregional reccurence (5% vs. 14%; p < 0.001); however, 10- and 15-year survival rates were similar between the groups [33,34]. In addition, 5-year survival after any relapse significantly lower in PORT patients compared to the control group. The crucial point of this study, the vaginal cuff was the most common site of recurrence in the observation arm [33].
Furthermore, toxicity is one of the main determinant factors in choosing the best treatment approach, as PORT and VBT produce similar survival rates in the early-stage tumors [7,35]. According to the updated staging system the risk of locoregional recurrence is reported 14.3% with comprehensive surgery in even stage Ib grade III disease [36]. On this basis, follow-up alone after comprehensive surgical staging may yield high survival rates [17,37,38]. Although data with VBT alone is limited due to small number of randomized clinical studies, recent studies have suggested to apply VBT in high-risk node (-) disease in patients undergoing lymph node dissection [17,23,39]. Additionally, VBT has been shown to reduce the morbidity with providing high local control rates in the clinical trials [21-25]. Neverthless adjuvant PORT is still widely adopted approach due to controversial studies [40,41].
One of the initial studies in which VBT was assigned as a separate arm was carried out by Aalders et al. [7] which included 540 patients. All patients with stage Ib grade III and stage Ic based on definite surgical staging results were randomized to no further treatment or classified as postoperative VBT + PORT. Combined therapy decreased locoregional recurrence without any impact on survival, compared to VBT alone. On the other hand, the high rate of locoregional recurrence in VBT alone was associated with not performing lymph node dissection and the study results were found controversial in terms of efficacy of VBT. Moreover, in a recent pivotal PORTEC-II study with a large sample size, VBT and PORT were compared among the patients with early-stage disease at an intermediate-high-risk group [35]. There was no statistically significant difference in the 5-year local recurrence, locoregional control, distant metastasis, and survival rates; however, a higher number of patients receiving pelvic radiation therapy had side effects.
The rate of vaginal recurrence has been reported to be 5% in patients undergoing surgical staging without adjuvant therapy [42], while it has been estimated to be 10% in patients undergoing incomprehensive or no surgical staging [8]. However, in a study including patients with stage Ic grade III disease, vaginal recurrence was found to be 4.6% among the patients undergoing radical hysterectomy, followed by brachytherapy during a 48-month follow-up [43]. Similarly, Rahatli et al. [38] included 62 patients with stage Ib grade I–III disease and performed postoperative VBT on 21%. Five-year DFS rate was 94.4% and OS rate was 93.1%. The authors concluded that, although the majority of the patients did not receive postoperative adjuvant therapy, stage Ib disease with low recurrence rates could be managed with surgery alone.
Several studies have shown that vaginal recurrence is associated with deep myometrial invasion, high-grade disease, LVI, and cervical involvement in patients receiving no adjuvant therapy [11,33]. Recent data have suggested that LVI may be a prognostic factor for vaginal recurrence in poorly differentiated tumors with minimal deep invasion [44]. On the other hand, although myometrial invasion is a predictive factor for survival [32,45], some authors have suggested that it has no impact on DFS and recurrence [17,44]. In consistent with the current literature datas, the depth of myometrial invasion was not associated with locoregional recurrence and survival in our study. Even though LVI was a significant factor for DFS, the predominant failure was distant metastasis. Regarding there was no regional failure with VBT only and LVI was the most important factor DFS, additional adjuvant chemotherapy might be considered for these patients with LVI [46].
Furthermore, grade is a major prognostic factor for vaginal and pelvic recurrence [23,24]. Several studies have shown that progression-free survival (PFS) [5] and DFS rates are lower in grade III disease [47]. In addition, one-third of stage Ic grade III tumors may distantly metastasize [8]. In such cases, more aggressive treatment options including chemotherapy can be administered due to high risk of pelvic and distant metastases. In a subgroup analysis conducted by the Nordic Society of Gynecological Oncology/European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (NSOG/EORTC) task force, chemotherapy contributed to improved PFS rates in this patient population [48]. In the current study, however, a higher number of patients with stage Ib grade III had distant metastases, indicating no statistically significant difference. We also found no contributor factor for DFS and OS.
Moreover, VBT alone and chemotherapy have been increasingly widely adopted as effective treatment modalities in early-stage high-risk tumor histology and high-grade tumors. In Mayo Clinic study, 103 patients with stage I serous papillary and clear-cell carcinoma received postoperative VBT or VBT + chemotherapy (34%) and 5-year OS rate was found to be 84% with a vaginal recurrence rate of 3% and locoregional recurrence rate of 7% [49]. The authors concluded that VBT was effective in preventing vaginal recurrences in patients with comprehensive surgical staging and stage I serous papillary and clear-cell carcinoma. Larger sites for VBT were not considered appropriate, as the rate of pelvic and extra-pelvic recurrences was low. In a review stage I–II serous papillary received adjuvant VBT + chemotherapy and local control rate was found to be 97.5% (range, 91% to 100%), and OS to be 93% (range, 82% to 94%) during a mean of 24.8-month follow-up period [50]. In our study, despite the limited number of high-grade tumor histology, none of the patients treated with VBT + chemotherapy had locoregional recurrence.
Additionally, LVI is known to increase the risk of vaginal recurrence [8,10,18,51]. The presence of LVI is also significantly associated with lymph node metastasis, tumor recurrence, and survival [52]. In our study, we obtained decreased DFS in the patients with LVI without any impact on local control and OS.
Currently, surgical approaches have attempted to add pelvic paraaortic lymphadenectomy to definite diagnosis and radical hysterectomy [11,53]. As a result, Lutman et al. [54] showed an association between the number of lymph nodes dissected and survival. The survival rate increased in high-risk patients with stage I–II endometrial cancer, if more than 12 lymph nodes were dissected. In consistent with these findings, we also observed that OS rate was significantly higher in patients in whom more than 20 lymph nodes were dissected. No pelvic lymph node recurrence despite VBT can be a determinant factor for identifying the need for lymphadenectomy as an adjuvant therapy.
Vaginal bracytherapy is an effective and adequate treatment modality in early-stage endometrial cancer even in stage Ib grade III disease with low cost and toxicity rate [21]. The most common side effects include mucosal telangiectasia, atrophy, stricture or adhesion. Dose distribution is often localized with VBT; therefore, radiation dose absorbed by the small intestines can be neglected and rectal dose can be adjusted below the threshold. In our study, none of the patients had serious complications and the quality of life was preserved.
In conclusion, given the fact that the vaginal cuff is the most common site of recurrence in early-stage endometrium cancer, VBT alone is safe and efficient treatment in surgically staged disease. In exceptional, it has been suggested to add chemotherapy to brachytherapy in the patients with stage Ib grade III and unfavorabl histopathological reports according to guidelines.

Notes

Conflict of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Notes

Author Contribution

Conceptualization: CDA, SA; Investigation and methodology: CDA; Project administration: CDA; Resources: SKC; Supervision: CDA; Writing of the original draft: CDA; Writing of the review and editing: MK; Software: CDA; Validation: SA; Formal analysis: CDA; Data curation: CDA; Visualization: CDA. All the authors have proofread the final version.

Table 1.
Tumor characteristics
Characteristic n (%)
Depth of invasion
 Ia 38 (37)
 Ib 66 (63)
Grade
 I 38 (37)
 II 40 (38)
 III 24 (25)
Squamous variant
 Yes 34 (61)
 No 64 (33)
 Unknown 6 (6)
LUSI
 Yes 24 (23)
 No 80 (77)
Lymphatic invasion
 Yes 30 (29)
 No 74 (71)
Vascular invasion
 Yes 4 (96)
 No 100 (4)
Tumor size (cm)
 <3 46 (44)
 ≥3 38 (56)
Tumor volume (cm3)
 <13 82 (79)
 ≥13 22 (21)
Number of pelvic nodes
 <20 56 (54)
 ≥20 48(46)
Number of para-aortic nodes
 <5 42 (40)
 ≥5 48 (60)
Tumor histology
 Adenocarcinoma 96 (92)
 Undifferentiated 2 (2)
 Clear cell 4 (4)
 Serous papillary 2 (2)

LUSI, lower uterine segment involvement.

Table 2.
Prognostic factors associated with DFS, univariate analysis
DFS (%) p-value
Lymphatic invasion 0.020
 Yes 74
 No 95
Number of pelvic nodes 0.714
 <20 90
 ≥20 88
Number of para-aortic nodes 0.610
 <5 85
 ≥5 90
Time surgery-RT (day) 0.966
 <45 92
 ≥45 84

DFS, disease-free survival; RT, radiotherapy.

Table 3.
Cox regression analysis for disease-free survival
HR p-value % (95 CI)
Tumor histology 0.694 0.636 2.4 (1.3–4.3)
Grade
 I 0.011 0.532 0.7 (0.3–1.4)
 II
 III
Myometrium invasion
 <1/2 0.965 0.901 1.5 (0.9–2.5)
 >1/2
LVI
 Yes 1.604 0.044 4.1 (2.2–7.6)
 No
Age (yr)
 <65 1.810 0.403 1.0 (0.9–1.0)
 ≥65

LVI, lymphovascular invasion; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Table 4.
Cox regression analysis for overall survival
HR p-value % (95 CI)
Metastases
 Yes 1.15 0.017 1.5 (1.01–1.29) 
 No
Grade
 I 2.15 0.714 1.2 (0.11–2.78)
 II
 III
Myometrium invasion
 <1/2 1.0 0.610 1.01 (1.4–1.43)
 >1/2
LVI
 Yes 2.68 0.966 1 (0.82–1.05)
 No
Age (yr)
 <65 2.16 0.491 2.0 (0.69–2.65)
 ≥65

LVI, lymphovascular invasion; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

References

1. Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T, et al. Cancer statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin 2004;54:8–29.
crossref pmid
2. Kitchener HC. Survival from endometrial cancer in England and Wales up to 2001. Br J Cancer 2008;99 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S68–9.
crossref pmid
3. Cheung MR. African American race and low income neighborhoods decrease cause specific survival of endometrial cancer: a SEER analysis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013;14:2567–70.
crossref pmid
4. Meerwaldt JH, Hoekstra CJ, van Putten WL, Tjokrowardojo AJ, Koper PC. Endometrial adenocarcinoma, adjuvant radiotherapy tailored to prognostic factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1990;18:299–304.
crossref pmid
5. Grigsby PW, Perez CA, Kuten A, et al. Clinical stage I endometrial cancer: prognostic factors for local control and distant metastasis and implications of the new FIGO surgical staging system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1992;22:905–11.
crossref pmid
6. Brady LW, Perez CA, Bedwinek JM. Failure patterns in gynecologic cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1986;12:549–57.
crossref pmid
7. Aalders JG, vd Syde R, Poppema S, Szabo BG, Janssens J. Prognostic factors and changing trends in the treatment of stage I endometrial cancer: a clinical and histopathological study of 182 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1984;10:2083–8.
crossref pmid
8. Creutzberg CL, van Putten WL, Koper PC, et al. Surgery and postoperative radiotherapy versus surgery alone for patients with stage-1 endometrial carcinoma: multicentre randomised trial. PORTEC Study Group. Lancet 2000;355:1404–11.
pmid
9. Rose PG. Endometrial carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1996;335:640–9.
crossref pmid
10. Keys HM, Roberts JA, Brunetto VL, et al. A phase III trial of surgery with or without adjunctive external pelvic radiation therapy in intermediate risk endometrial adenocarcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 2004;92:744–51.
crossref pmid
11. Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Homesley HD, Graham JE, Heller PB. Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Cancer 1987;60(8 Suppl):2035–41.
crossref pmid
12. Chuang L, Burke TW, Tornos C, et al. Staging laparotomy for endometrial carcinoma: assessment of retroperitoneal lymph nodes. Gynecol Oncol 1995;58:189–93.
crossref pmid
13. Lo KW, Cheung TH, Yu MY, Yim SF, Chung TK. The value of pelvic and para- aortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer to avoid unnecessary radiotherapy. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003;13:863–9.
crossref pmid
14. Orr JW Jr, Holimon JL, Orr PF. Stage I corpus cancer: is teletherapy necessary? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;176:777–88.
crossref pmid
15. Kong A, Johnson N, Kitchener HC, Lawrie TA. Adjuvant radiotherapy for stage I endometrial cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;(3):CD003916.
crossref
16. Fanning J, Nanavati PJ, Hilgers RD. Surgical staging and high dose rate brachytherapy for endometrial cancer: limiting external radiotherapy to node-positive tumors. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87:1041–4.
crossref pmid
17. Mohan DS, Samuels MA, Selim MA, et al. Long-term outcomes of therapeutic pelvic lymphadenectomy for stage I endometrial adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1998;70:165–71.
crossref pmid
18. Larson DM, Broste SK, Krawisz BR. Surgery without radiotherapy for primary treatment of endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91:355–9.
crossref
19. Creutzberg CL, van Putten WL, Koper PC, et al. The morbidity of treatment for patients with stage I endometrial cancer: results from a randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;51:1246–55.
crossref pmid
20. Reboux PA, Azais H, Canova CH, et al. Impact of vaginal brachytherapy in intermediate and high-intermediate risk endometrial cancer: a multicenter study from the FRANCOGYN group. J Gynecol Oncol 2019;30:e53.
crossref pmid pmc
21. MacLeod C, Fowler A, Duval P, et al. High-dose-rate brachytherapy alone post-hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998;42:1033–9.
crossref pmid
22. Anderson JM, Stea B, Hallum AV, Rogoff E, Childers J. High-dose-rate postoperative vaginal cuff irradiation alone for stage IB and IC endometrial cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;46:417–25.
crossref pmid
23. Weiss E, Hirnle P, Arnold-Bofinger H, Hess CF, Bamberg M. Adjuvant vaginal high-dose-rate afterloading alone in endometrial carcinoma: patterns of relapse and side effects following low-dose therapy. Gynecol Oncol 1998;71:72–6.
crossref pmid
24. Chadha M, Nanavati PJ, Liu P, Fanning J, Jacobs A. Patterns of failure in endometrial carcinoma stage IB grade 3 and IC patients treated with postoperative vaginal vault brachytherapy. Gynecol Oncol 1999;75:103–7.
crossref pmid
25. Marchetti DL, Piver MS, Tsukada Y, Reese P. Prevention of vaginal recurrence of stage I endometrial adenocarcinoma with postoperative vaginal radiation. Obstet Gynecol 1986;67:399–402.
crossref
26. Orr JW Jr, Holloway RW, Orr PF, Holimon JL. Surgical staging of uterine cancer: an analysis of perioperative morbidity. Gynecol Oncol 1991;42:209–16.
crossref pmid
27. Stryker JA, Podczaski E, Kaminski P, Velkley DE. Adjuvant external beam therapy for pathologic stage I and occult stage II endometrial carcinoma. Cancer 1991;67:2872–9.
crossref pmid
28. Jereczek-Fossa B, Jassem J, Nowak R, Badzio A. Late complications after postoperative radiotherapy in endometrial cancer: analysis of 317 consecutive cases with application of linear-quadratic model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998;41:329–38.
crossref pmid
29. Snijders-Keilholz A, Stork M, Davelaar J, Hermans J, Leer JW. Endometrial carcinoma, results of combined surgery and radiotherapy treatment of 93 patients (1979-1984). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1990;36:125–35.
crossref pmid
30. Corn BW, Lanciano RM, Greven KM, et al. Impact of improved irradiation technique, age, and lymph node sampling on the severe complication rate of surgically staged endometrial cancer patients: a multivariate analysis. J Clin Oncol 1994;12:510–5.
crossref pmid
31. Torrisi JR, Barnes WA, Popescu G, et al. Postoperative adjuvant external-beam radiotherapy in surgical stage I endometrial carcinoma. Cancer 1989;64:1414–7.
crossref pmid
32. Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Kurman RJ, et al. Relationship between surgical-pathological risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endometrium: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 1991;40:55–65.
crossref pmid
33. Scholten AN, van Putten WL, Beerman H, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy for stage 1 endometrial carcinoma: long-term outcome of the randomized PORTEC trial with central pathology review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;63:834–8.
crossref pmid
34. Creutzberg CL, Nout RA, Lybeert ML, et al. Fifteen-year radiotherapy outcomes of the randomized PORTEC-1 trial for endometrial carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;81:e631–8.
crossref pmid
35. Wortman BG, Creutzberg CL, Putter H, et al. Ten-year results of the PORTEC-2 trial for high-intermediate risk endometrial carcinoma: improving patient selection for adjuvant therapy. Br J Cancer 2018;119:1067–74.
crossref pmid pmc
36. Zuurendonk LD, Smit RA, Mol BW, et al. Routine pelvic lymphadenectomy in apparently early stage endometrial cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006;32:450–4.
crossref pmid
37. Chen SS. Operative treatment in stage I endometrial carcinoma with deep myometrial invasion and/or grade 3 tumor surgically limited to the corpus uteri. No recurrence with only primary surgery. Cancer 1989;63:1843–5.
crossref pmid
38. Rahatli S, Dizdar O, Kucukoztas N, et al. Good outcomes of patients with stage IB endometrial cancer with surgery alone. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2014;15:3891–3.
crossref pmid
39. Weiss E, Hirnle P, Arnold-Bofinger H, Hess CF, Bamberg M. Therapeutic outcome and relation of acute and late side effects in the adjuvant radiotherapy of endometrial carcinoma stage I and II. Radiother Oncol 1999;53:37–44.
crossref pmid
40. Naumann RW, Higgins RV, Hall JB. The use of adjuvant radiation therapy by members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists. Gynecol Oncol 1999;75:4–9.
crossref pmid
41. Koh WJ, Tran AB, Douglas JG, Stelzer KJ. Radiation therapy in endometrial cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2001;15:417–32.
crossref pmid
42. Straughn JM, Huh WK, Orr JW Jr, et al. Stage IC adenocarcinoma of the endometrium: survival comparisons of surgically staged patients with and without adjuvant radiation therapy. Gynecol Oncol 2003;89:295–300.
crossref pmid
43. Atahan IL, Ozyar E, Yildiz F, et al. Vaginal high dose rate brachytherapy alone in patients with intermediate- to high-risk stage I endometrial carcinoma after radical surgery. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008;18:1294–9.
crossref pmid
44. Alektiar KM, McKee A, Venkatraman E, et al. Intravaginal high-dose-rate brachytherapy for Stage IB (FIGO Grade 1, 2) endometrial cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;53:707–13.
crossref pmid
45. Singh N, Hirschowitz L, Zaino R, et al. Pathologic prognostic factors in endometrial carcinoma (other than tumor type and grade). Int J Gynecol Pathol 2019;38 Suppl 1(Iss 1 Suppl 1):S93–113.
crossref pmid
46. Concin N, Matias-Guiu X, Vergote I, et al. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Radiother Oncol 2021;154:327–53.
crossref pmid
47. Konski A, Domenico D, Tyrkus M, et al. Prognostic characteristics of surgical stage I endometrial adenocarcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996;35:935–40.
crossref pmid
48. Hogberg T, Signorelli M, de Oliveira CF, et al. Sequential adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy in endometrial cancer: results from two randomised studies. Eur J Cancer 2010;46:2422–31.
pmid pmc
49. Barney BM, Petersen IA, Mariani A, Dowdy SC, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Haddock MG. The role of vaginal brachytherapy in the treatment of surgical stage I papillary serous or clear cell endometrial cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013;85:109–15.
crossref pmid
50. Lancellotta V, De Felice F, Vicenzi L, et al. The role of vaginal brachytherapy in stage I endometrial serous cancer: a systematic review. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2020;12:61–6.
crossref pmid pmc
51. Arslan SA, Avcı GG, Akkas EA, Guney Y. Improved disease-free survival with adjuvant radiotherapy in early-stage endometrial cancer: 10-year outcome analysis. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2020;12:572–8.
crossref pmid pmc
52. Inoue Y, Obata K, Abe K, et al. The prognostic significance of vascular invasion by endometrial carcinoma. Cancer 1996;78:1447–51.
crossref pmid
53. Nwachukwu C, Baskovic M, Von Eyben R, et al. Recurrence risk factors in stage IA grade 1 endometrial cancer. J Gynecol Oncol 2021;32:e22.
crossref pmid pmc
54. Lutman CV, Havrilesky LJ, Cragun JM, et al. Pelvic lymph node count is an important prognostic variable for FIGO stage I and II endometrial carcinoma with high-risk histology. Gynecol Oncol 2006;102:92–7.
crossref pmid
TOOLS
PDF Links  PDF Links
PubReader  PubReader
ePub Link  ePub Link
XML Download  XML Download
Full text via DOI  Full text via DOI
Download Citation  Download Citation
CrossRef TDM  CrossRef TDM
  E-Mail
  Print
Share:      
METRICS
0
Crossref
0
Scopus
603
View
25
Download
Related article
Editorial Office
Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital,
Hamchun Hall, 6F, 95 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 03082, Republic of Korea
Tel : +82-2-743-6574
E-mail: roj@kosro.or.kr
Copyright © The Korean Society for Radiation Oncology.                      Developed in M2PI
Close layer
prev next