Search

Abstract: Objective.: The objective of this study was to compare the significance of numbers of metastatic (MLN) and removed lymph nodes (RLN) between primary surgical treatment (PST) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (NCS) in patients with FIGO stage IB1 to IIA cervical cancer. Methods.: Among 1124 patients with cervical cancer, PST (n =451) and NCS (n =73) groups were enrolled for evaluating the association between numbers of MLN and RLN, and clinical outcomes including the pattern of recurrence and survival according to the 2 treatments. Results.: Mean values of progression-free survival (PFS) were 100.8 vs. 87.6 vs. 57.7months in 0 vs. 1–2 vs. ≥3 MLN, suggesting that ≥3 MLN was associated with poor PFS (adjusted HR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.02 to 7.21). However, there was no association between the number of MLN and survival in NCS group. The increased number of MLN was also associated with the increase of distant metastasis in PST group (44.0% vs. 72.7% vs. 78.6%; p =0.02), whereas there was no association between the number of MLN and the pattern of recurrence in NCS group. Moreover, mean values of PFS were 57.2 (<20 RLN) vs. 77.9months (≥20 RLN) in PST group with lymph node metastasis (p =0.04), demonstrating that ≥20 RLN improved PFS in PST group (adjusted HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.95). Conclusions.: The increased number of MLN may be more significant for predicting poor survival and distant metastasis, and the increased number of RLN may be associated with better survival in the patients treated with PST than those treated with NCS. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Objective: To evaluate whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery (NCS) is more efficient than primary surgical treatment (PST) for improving clinical outcomes in FIGO stage IB1-IIA cervical cancer. Methods: We conducted a matched-case comparison where 61 patients treated with NCS were matched to 183 treated with PST. We compared intermediate- and high-risk factors, the need of adjuvant radiotherapy, disease recurrence and survivals between NCS and PST. Patients with ≥2 intermediate- or ≥1 high-risk factors received adjuvant concurrent chemoradiation using cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Results: NCS reduced more definitely intermediate- and high-risk factors than PST in stage IIA disease in spite of little difference of them in stage IB disease (large tumor size, 25% vs. 52.4%; deep stromal invasion, 57.1% vs. 82.1%; lymphovascular space invasion, 35.7% vs. 65.5%; parametrial invasion, 17.9% vs. 41.7%; p <0.05). Moreover, ≥2 intermediate-risk factors were less common in NCS than PST despite no difference of the number of high-risk factors between the 2 treatments, which decreased the need of adjuvant radiotherapy in patients with stage IIA disease who received NCS (46.4% vs. 84.5%, p <0.01). Although there were no differences in progression-free survival and disease recurrence between the 2 treatments, NCS led to poorer overall survival than PST in stage IIA disease with no difference of it in stage IB disease. Conclusions: The efficacy between NCS and PST may be similar in FIGO stage IB cervical cancer. However, NCS can lead to poor prognosis despite the reduction of intermediate-risk factors and the need of adjuvant radiotherapy in FIGO stage IIA disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]