Journal of Gynecologic Oncology

Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology (대한부인종양학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A comparison of uterine papillary serous, clear cell carcinomas, and grade 3 endometrioid corpus cancers using 2009 FIGO staging system

  • Kim, Ha-Jeong (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wonkwang University Sanbon Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Tae-Joong (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Yoo-Young (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Choi, Chel Hun (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Jeong-Won (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Bae, Duk-Soo (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Byoung-Gie (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
  • Published : 2013.04.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This study was designed to compare survival outcomes of patients with uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC) or clear cell carcinoma (CC) to those of patients with grade 3 endometrioid carcinoma (G3EC) according to 1988 and 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging systems. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with endometrial cancer treated at a single institution between 1995 and 2009. Among the 647 patients with endometrial cancer, 51 with G3EC and 46 with UPSC and CC histology were confirmed. Results: 1988 FIGO stage, 2009 FIGO stage, and extrauterine metastasis were significantly different between the UPSC and CC group and G3EC group (p=0.002, p=0.041, and p=0.020, respectively). Restaging from the 1988 FIGO to the 2009 FIGO criteria increased the number of stage I cases by 10 (11.0%). Overall, 8 in the UPSC and CC and 2 in the G3EC group were down-staged to stage I. In the UPSC and CC group, the 3-year overall survival for 1988 FIGO stage I was 92.9%. When UPSC and CC patients were restaged using the 2009 staging system, the 3-year overall survival of 2009 FIGO stage I dropped to 81.6%. UPSC and CC was associated with poor OS outcome compared with G3EC, after adjustment for 2009 FIGO stage and other clinicopathologic factors. Conclusion: We observed that UPSC and CC patients had different prognosis according to the old and new FIGO staging system. Our results suggest that UPSC and CC compared with the G3EC may retain the 1988 FIGO to be a slightly better discriminator than 2009 FIGO.

Keywords

References

  1. Amant F, Moerman P, Neven P, Timmerman D, Van Limbergen E, Vergote I. Endometrial cancer. Lancet 2005;366:491-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67063-8
  2. Lee HP. Annual report of gynecologic cancer registry program in Korea: 1991-2004. Korean J Obstet Gynecol 2008;51:1411-20.
  3. SOG Gynecologic Oncology Committee. Annual report of gynecologic cancer registry program in Korea for 2004 (Jan. 1st, 2004-Dec. 31st, 2004). Korean J Obstet Gynecol 2007;50:28-78.
  4. Bokhman JV. Two pathogenetic types of endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1983;15:10-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-8258(83)90111-7
  5. Tavassoli FA, Devilee P. WHO classification of tumors: pathology and cenetics. Tumors of the breast and female genital organs. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer Press; 2003.
  6. Hamilton CA, Cheung MK, Osann K, Chen L, Teng NN, Longacre TA, et al. Uterine papillary serous and clear cell carcinomas predict for poorer survival compared to grade 3 endometrioid corpus cancers. Br J Cancer 2006;94:642-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6603012
  7. Boruta DM 2nd, Gehrig PA, Groben PA, Bae-Jump V, Boggess JF, Fowler WC Jr, et al. Uterine serous and grade 3 endometrioid carcinomas: is there a survival difference? Cancer 2004;101:2214-21. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.20645
  8. Soslow RA, Bissonnette JP, Wilton A, Ferguson SE, Alektiar KM, Duska LR, et al. Clinicopathologic analysis of 187 highgrade endometrial carcinomas of different histologic subtypes: similar outcomes belie distinctive biologic differences. Am J Surg Pathol 2007;31:979-87. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e31802ee494
  9. Voss MA, Ganesan R, Ludeman L, McCarthy K, Gornall R, Schaller G, et al. Should grade 3 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma be considered a type 2 cancer-a clinical and pathological evaluation. Gynecol Oncol 2012;124:15-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.07.030
  10. Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009;105:103-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.02.012
  11. Lewin SN, Herzog TJ, Barrena Medel NI, Deutsch I, Burke WM, Sun X, et al. Comparative performance of the 2009 international Federation of gynecology and obstetrics' staging system for uterine corpus cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:1141-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181f39849
  12. Cooke EW, Pappas L, Gaffney DK. Does the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for endometrial cancer lead to increased discrimination in patient outcomes? Cancer 2011;117: 4231-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26030
  13. Creasman W. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009;105:109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.02.010
  14. Song T, Choi CH, Lee YY, Kim TJ, Lee JW, Kim BG, et al. Which is worse: uterine papillary serous carcinomas or carcinosarcomas? J Gynecol Oncol 2011;22:83-8. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2011.22.2.83
  15. Carcangiu ML, Chambers JT. Early pathologic stage clear cell carcinoma and uterine papillary serous carcinoma of the endometrium: comparison of clinicopathologic features and survival. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1995;14:30-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004347-199501000-00006
  16. Cirisano FD Jr, Robboy SJ, Dodge RK, Bentley RC, Krigman HR, Synan IS, et al. The outcome of stage I-II clinically and surgically staged papillary serous and clear cell endometrial cancers when compared with endometrioid carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2000;77:55-65. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.2000.5737
  17. Alektiar KM, McKee A, Lin O, Venkatraman E, Zelefsky MJ, McKee B, et al. Is there a difference in outcome between stage I-II endometrial cancer of papillary serous/clear cell and endometrioid FIGO Grade 3 cancer? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;54:79-85.
  18. Halperin R, Zehavi S, Langer R, Hadas E, Bukovsky I, Schneider D. Uterine papillary serous carcinoma (pure and mixed type) compared with moderately and poorly differentiated endometrioid carcinoma. A clinicopathologic study. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2002;23:300-4.
  19. Creasman WT, Kohler MF, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, Boyle P. Prognosis of papillary serous, clear cell, and grade 3 stage I carcinoma of the endometrium. Gynecol Oncol 2004;95:593-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.08.019
  20. Alkushi A, Kobel M, Kalloger SE, Gilks CB. High-grade endometrial carcinoma: serous and grade 3 endometrioid carcinomas have different immunophenotypes and outcomes. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2010;29:343-50. https://doi.org/10.1097/PGP.0b013e3181cd6552
  21. Greggi S, Mangili G, Scaffa C, Scala F, Losito S, Iodice F, et al. Uterine papillary serous, clear cell, and poorly differentiated endometrioid carcinomas: a comparative study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2011;21:661-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182150c89
  22. Bristow RE, Asrari F, Trimble EL, Montz FJ. Extended surgical staging for uterine papillary serous carcinoma: survival outcome of locoregional (Stage I-III) disease. Gynecol Oncol 2001;81:279-86. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.2001.6159
  23. Schwartz PE. The management of serous papillary uterine cancer. Curr Opin Oncol 2006;18:494-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.cco.0000239890.36408.75
  24. Hamilton CA, Liou WS, Osann K, Berman ML, Husain A, Teng NN, et al. Impact of adjuvant therapy on survival of patients with early-stage uterine papillary serous carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;63:839-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.03.028
  25. Chan JK, Loizzi V, Youssef M, Osann K, Rutgers J, Vasilev SA, et al. Significance of comprehensive surgical staging in noninvasive papillary serous carcinoma of the endometrium. Gynecol Oncol 2003;90:181-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-8258(03)00195-1
  26. Fader AN, Starks D, Gehrig PA, Secord AA, Frasure HE, O'Malley DM, et al. An updated clinicopathologic study of early-stage uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC). Gynecol Oncol 2009;115:244-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.07.030
  27. Kelly MG, O'malley DM, Hui P, McAlpine J, Yu H, Rutherford TJ, et al. Improved survival in surgical stage I patients with uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC) treated with adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. Gynecol Oncol 2005;98:353-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.06.012
  28. Fader AN, Drake RD, O'Malley DM, Gibbons HE, Huh WK, Havrilesky LJ, et al. Platinum/taxane-based chemotherapy with or without radiation therapy favorably impacts survival outcomes in stage I uterine papillary serous carcinoma. Cancer 2009;115:2119-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24247
  29. Fields AL, Einstein MH, Novetsky AP, Gebb J, Goldberg GL. Pilot phase II trial of radiation "sandwiched" between combination paclitaxel/platinum chemotherapy in patients with uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC). Gynecol Oncol 2008;108:201-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2007.09.025
  30. Roelofsen T, van Ham MA, de Hullu JA, Massuger LF. Clinical management of uterine papillary serous carcinoma. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2011;11:71-81. https://doi.org/10.1586/era.10.199
  31. Werner HM, Trovik J, Marcickiewicz J, Tingulstad S, Staff AC, Amant F, et al. Revision of FIGO surgical staging in 2009 for endometrial cancer validates to improve risk stratification. Gynecol Oncol 2012;125:103-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.11.008
  32. Mariani A, Webb MJ, Keeney GL, Aletti G, Podratz KC. Assessment of prognostic factors in stage IIIA endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2002;86:38-44. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.2002.6713
  33. Abu-Rustum NR, Zhou Q, Iasonos A, Alektiar KM, Leitao MM Jr, Chi DS, et al. The revised 2009 FIGO staging system for endometrial cancer: should the 1988 FIGO stages IA and IB be altered? Int J Gynecol Cancer 2011;21:511-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0b013e31820cc305
  34. Seward S, Ali-Fehmi R, Munkarah AR, Semaan A, Al-Wahab ZR, Elshaikh MA, et al. Outcomes of patients with uterine serous carcinoma using the revised FIGO staging system. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2012;22:452-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0b013e31823de6dd

Cited by

  1. Survival of women with clear cell and papillary serous endometrial cancer after adjuvant radiotherapy vol.9, pp.None, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717x-9-141
  2. FIGO 1988 versus 2009 staging for endometrial carcinoma: a comparative study on prediction of survival and stage distribution according to histologic subtype vol.25, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2014.25.1.30
  3. Incidence and Clinical Outcomes of Non-endometrioid Carcinoma of Endometrium: Siriraj Hospital Experience vol.15, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.6.2905
  4. Adjuvant Radiation Therapy is associated with Improved Pelvic Control and Overall Survival in FIGO IB Endometrial Carcinoma with High Grade Histology vol.138, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.06.022
  5. Canadian high risk endometrial cancer (CHREC) consortium: Analyzing the clinical behavior of high risk endometrial cancers vol.139, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.09.001
  6. Analysis of recurrence and survival rates in grade 3 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma vol.12, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2016.4918
  7. A comparison of clinico-pathologic characteristics of patients with serous and clear cell carcinoma of the uterus vol.13, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4274/tjod.14478
  8. Impact of histology and surgical approach on survival among women with early-stage, high-grade uterine cancer: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group ancillary analysis vol.143, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.016
  9. Binary grading may be more appropriate for endometrial cancer vol.21, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4274/jtgga.galenos.2019.2019.0068
  10. Comparison of survival outcomes and effects of therapy between subtypes of high-grade endometrial cancer - a population-based study vol.60, pp.7, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186x.2021.1914347
  11. Factors associated with an increased risk of recurrence in patients diagnosed with high-grade endometrial cancer undergoing minimally invasive surgery: A study of the society of gynecologic oncology o vol.162, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.06.013