Outcome of endometrial carcinoma patients with involvement of the uterine serosa

Citation
Jb. Ashman et al., Outcome of endometrial carcinoma patients with involvement of the uterine serosa, GYNECOL ONC, 82(2), 2001, pp. 338-343
Citations number
37
Categorie Soggetti
Reproductive Medicine
Journal title
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY
ISSN journal
00908258 → ACNP
Volume
82
Issue
2
Year of publication
2001
Pages
338 - 343
Database
ISI
SICI code
0090-8258(200108)82:2<338:OOECPW>2.0.ZU;2-X
Abstract
Objective. The goal of this work was to evaluate the outcome of endometrial carcinoma patients undergoing primary surgery who have serosal involvement (SI). Methods. Between 1980 and 1998, 562 women underwent primary surgery for end ometrial cancer at the University of Chicago. Thirty-nine were noted to hav e SI. FIGO stages were IIIA (19), IIIB (1), IIIC (7), and IV (12). Of the 1 9 IIIA patients, 15 had solitary SI. Twenty-six patients received pelvic ra diation therapy (RT) with or without vaginal brachytherapy (VB). One patien t received whole-abdomen radiation therapy, and 13, adjuvant chemotherapy. Solitary SI patients received pelvic RT with or without VB as their sole ad juvant therapy. Disease-free survivals (DFSs) were estimated using the meth od of Kaplan and Meier and prognostic factors were analyzed by the log-rank test. Results. With a median follow-up of 30.3 months, the 5-year actuarial DFS o f the entire group was 28.9%. Factors correlated with disease recurrence in cluded tumor stage (P = 0.003) and lymph node involvement (P = 0.04). In ad dition, patients with solitary SI had a better 5-year DFS (41.5% vs 20%, P = 0.04) than patients with SI plus other extrauterine sites. Relapse occurr ed in 23 women overall and in 7 of 15 solitary SI patients. The most common site of disease recurrence was distant both in the entire group and in the solitary SI patients. While abdominal recurrences were common in the entir e group, they were infrequent in solitary SI patients. Conclusion. Endometrial carcinoma patients with SI have a high rate of rela pse and a poor outcome. Even when patients have extrauterine disease limite d to SI, the outcome is relatively unfavorable. Nonetheless, our results de monstrate the need to distinguish patients with solitary SI and those with Sl plus other extrauterine disease sites. (C) 2001 Academic Press.