4.7 Article

Treatment of high-risk uterine cancer with whole abdominopelvic radiation therapy

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(00)00724-0

关键词

endometrial carcinoma; radiotherapy; uterine papillary serous; whole abdominopelvic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To evaluate the treatment outcomes in patients with optimally debulked Stage III and IV endometrial adenocarcinoma (ACA) or Stages I-IV uterine papillary serous (UPSC) or clear cell (CCC) carcinoma of the uterus, treated postoperatively with whole abdominopelvic irradiation (WAPI). Methods and Materials: Between 1979 and 1998, 48 patients received postoperative WAPI at our institution. Twenty-two patients had FIGO Stage III or Stage IV ACA and 26 patients had FIGO Stages I-IV UPSC or CCC, The median dose was 30 Gy to the upper abdomen and 49.8 Gy to the pelvis. Mean follow-up was 37 months (2.4-135 months). Results: The 3-year estimated disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates for the entire group were 60% and 77%, respectively. Patients with ACA had 3-year DFS and OS of 79% and 89%, respectively, compared with 47% and 68% in the UPSC/CCC group. Early-stage patients (I and LI) with UPSC/CCC had 3-year DFS and OS of 87% compared with 32% and 61% in those with advanced (Stage III and IV) disease. The 3-year actuarial major complication rate was 7%, with no treatment-related deaths. All 4 failures in the ACA group were extra-abdominal and 6 of the 11 in the UPSC/CCC group had an extra-abdominal component. Age and UPSC/CCC histology were significant prognostic factors for DFS and OS. In addition, stage and number of extrauterine sites of disease were significant predictors for DFS in UPSC/CCC, Conclusion: WAPI is a safe, effective treatment for patients with optimally debulked advanced-stage uterine ACA or early-stage UPSC/CCC, Survival was significantly worse in advanced-stage UPSC/CCC patients, We recommend future trials of WAPI,vith concurrent, or subsequent systemic therapy in patients with advanced-stage UPSC or CCC. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据