Role of Radiation Therapy in the Multidisciplinary Management of Uterine Carcinosarcoma

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 114-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jillian R. Gunther ◽  
Eva N. Christensen ◽  
Pamela K. Allen ◽  
Lois M. Ramondetta ◽  
Anuja Jhingran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
External Beam Radiation Therapy ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Uterine Carcinosarcoma ◽  
Beam Radiation

ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the impact of radiation therapy on outcomes for patients with uterine carcinosarcoma (UC).Methods/MaterialsWe retrospectively reviewed the records of 155 women with stage I (98), II (11), or III (46) UC who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy/bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy at our institution between 1990 and 2011. Survival rates were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed.ResultsSeventy-six patients (49%) received radiation therapy: 38 (50%) had vaginal cuff brachytherapy (VBT) alone and 38 had external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) ± VBT. Seventy patients (45%) received chemotherapy (12 concurrent, 49 adjuvant, 9 both). The 5-year overall survival rate was 48.6% (stage I, 53.8%; II, 30.0%; and III, 42.5%). The disease-specific survival (DSS) rate was 57.2% (stage I, 60.9%; II, 44.4%; and III, 51.8%). Patients treated with EBRT had a higher 5-year pelvic disease control rate (88.3%) than did patients treated with VBT only (67.4%) or no radiation (71.2%; P = 0.04). In stage III patients, EBRT was associated with higher 5-year pelvic disease control (90.0% vs 55.5%, P = 0.046), DSS (64.6% vs 46.4%, P = 0.13), and overall survival (64.6% vs 34.0%, P = 0.04) rates. For all 155 patients, age at least 65 years, cervical involvement, and lymph vascular space invasion were correlated with lower DSS on univariate and multivariate analyses. In addition, treatment with concurrent chemoradiation therapy was independently associated with a higher DSS rate on multivariate analysis.ConclusionsPatients with UC have a high rate of relapse in the regional nodes and distant sites. External beam radiation therapy improves locoregional control in all stages and may improve survival in stage III patients who are at the highest risk of pelvic relapse.

Impact of vaginal brachytherapy on survival in stage I endometrioid endometrial carcinoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 789-796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariam AlHilli ◽  
Sudha Amarnath ◽  
Paul Elson ◽  
Lisa Rybicki ◽  
Sean Dowdy
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
External Beam Radiation Therapy ◽  
Stage I ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Stage Ib ◽  
Stage Ia

ObjectiveTo evaluate trends in use of radiation therapy and its impact on overall survival in low- and high-grade stage I endometrioid endometrial carcinoma.MethodsPatients with stage I endometrial cancer who underwent hysterectomy from 2004 to 2013 were identified through the National Cancer Database and classified as: stage IA G1/2, stage IA G3, stage IB G1/2, and stage IB G3. Trends in use of vaginal brachytherapy and external beam radiation therapy were assessed. Overall survival was measured from surgery and estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The effect of radiation therapy on overall survival was assessed within each stage/grade group using Cox proportional hazards analysis in propensity-matched treatment groups.ResultsA total of 132 393 patients met inclusion criteria, and 81% of patients had stage IA and 19% had stage IB endometrial cancer. Adjuvant therapy was administered in 18% of patients: 52% received vaginal brachytherapy, 30% external beam radiation therapy, and 18% chemotherapy ±radiation therapy. External beam radiation therapy use decreased from 9% in 2004 to 4% in 2012, while vaginal brachytherapy use increased from 8% to 14%. Stage IA G1/2 patients did not benefit from either external beam radiation therapy or vaginal brachytherapy, while administration of vaginal brachytherapy improved overall survival in stage IB G1/2 compared with no treatment (p<0.0001). In stage IB G1/2 and stage IA G3, vaginal brachytherapy was superior to external beam radiation therapy (p=0.0004 and p=0.004, respectively). Stage IB G3 patients had improved overall survival with either vaginal brachytherapy or external beam radiation therapy versus no treatment but no difference in overall survival was seen between vaginal brachytherapy and external beam radiation therapy (p=0.94).ConclusionsThe delivery of adjuvant radiation therapy in patients with stage IA G1/2 endometrial carcinoma is not associated with improvement in overall survival. Patients with stage IB G1/2 and G3 as well as stage IA G3 are shown to benefit from improved overall survival when adjuvant radiation therapy is administered. These findings demonstrate potential opportunities to reduce both overtreatment and undertreatment in stage I endometrial cancer patients.

Impact of histological grade on oncologic outcomes in clinical stage I patients with endometrial carcinoma patients after definitive primary radiation therapy

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 890-896
Author(s):  
Adria Suarez Mora ◽  
Zachary Horne ◽  
Sarah Taylor ◽  
Alexander Babatunde Olawaiye ◽  
Sushil Beriwal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Histological Grade ◽  
Endometrial Adenocarcinoma ◽  
External Beam Radiation Therapy ◽  
Stage I ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Grade 3

ObjectivesTo determine the impact of histological grade on overall survival in patients with clinical stage I endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma when radiation therapy is used as primary definitive treatment.MethodsPatients with stage I endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinomas who underwent definitive radiation therapy with brachytherapy ± external beam radiation therapy were identified from the National Cancer Database. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to determine factors affecting overall survival. Inverse probability of treatment weights were also used in multivariable analysis to estimate casual effects of external beam radiation therapy.ResultsA total of 947 patients were identified. Median overall survival for grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3 tumors was 62 months (95% CI 53.8 to 70.2), 48.5 months (95% CI 38.2 to 58.8), and 33.5 months (95% CI: 23.1 to 43.8), respectively. Grade, age, and insurance status were associated with overall survival in univariate analysis with only grade and age remaining significant in multivariate analysis. Brachytherapy with external beam radiation therapy was not associated with survival in comparison with brachytherapy alone. Compared with grade 1 tumors, patients with grade 3 (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.89), but not grade 2 (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26), had an increased risk of death, which persisted in an inverse probability of treatment weights-adjusted model (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.93).ConclusionsPatients with grade 3 stage I endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma treated with primary definitive radiation therapy have worse survival than those with lower grade tumors. Addition of external beam radiation therapy to brachytherapy did not affect survival.

Patterns of relapse and second malignancy after adjuvant external beam radiation therapy for stage I-II seminoma.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 428-428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Steven Anderson ◽  
Michael Ryan Folkert ◽  
Michael J. Zelefsky ◽  
Kaled M. Alektiar ◽  
Sean Matthew McBride ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Elevated Serum ◽  
External Beam Radiation Therapy ◽  
Stage I ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Second Malignancy ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Nodal Region

428 Background: To determine relapse rate, patterns of relapse and risk of second malignancy (SM) from a large single institution experience of adjuvant external beam radiation therapy (RT) for stage I-II seminoma. Methods: 463 patients with clinical stage I (n = 339) and II (n = 124) seminoma underwent adjuvant RT (median 25.5Gy) between 2/1990 and 11/2015. Data was gathered by retrospective chart review. Patients with > 5 years of follow-up (n = 312) were included in analysis of SM risk. Of stage II patients, 72% (89/124) received a boost to gross disease (median 4.5Gy). Field design was para-aortic nodal region only (n = 96), para-aortic and ipsilateral pelvic nodal region (n = 351) or para-aortic and bilateral pelvic nodal region (n = 8). Field design was not available for 8 patients. Patients were followed with clinical exam, serial imaging, and tumor markers. Relapse and SM were confirmed pathologically. Results: At median follow-up of 7.9 years, there were 20 relapses (median 13.2 months; range 2.5-55.3 months). There were 9 and 11 relapses in stage I and II patients, respectively, with 7/20 (35%) occurring > 2 years after RT. Relapses were identified by clinical symptoms (n = 7), imaging (n = 9), or elevated serum markers (n = 4). Sites of relapses included the lung/mediastinum (n = 10), retroperitoneum/pelvis (n = 5), bone (n = 3) and inguinal nodes (n = 2). 15 (3 pelvic) occurred after para-aortic and ipsilateral pelvic lymph node RT, while 5 (2 pelvic) occurred after para-aortic RT alone. 19/20 patients received cisplatin-based chemotherapy for relapse and were without evidence of disease at last follow-up (median 123 months). Of 35 total non-testicular SM (33 patients), 17 (48.6%) were in the RT field, 4 (11.4%) were marginal and 14 (40%) were out of field. Common SM were prostate (10), lymphoma (4), bladder (3) and kidney (3). The 5 and 10 year overall survival for the cohort is 99.2% and 97.9%, respectively. Conclusions: Stage I-II seminoma patients have a low risk of relapse and SM following adjuvant RT. Relapse is less common in patients treated with para-aortic and pelvic fields. More than 1/3 of relapses occur more than 2 years after adjuvant RT, necessitating long term clinical, radiographic and biochemical follow-up.

Comparison of Neoadjuvant vs Concurrent/Adjuvant Androgen Deprivation in Men with High-risk Prostate Cancer Receiving Definitive Radiation Therapy

2017 ◽  
Vol 103 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-393
Author(s):  
Anna Lee ◽  
Daniel J. Becker ◽  
Ariel J. Lederman ◽  
Virginia W. Osborn ◽  
Meng S. Shao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
High Risk ◽  
External Beam Radiation Therapy ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
High Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer

Purpose It is unknown whether there is a benefit to starting androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) prior to rather than concurrently with definitive radiation therapy in men with high-risk prostate cancer. We studied the National Cancer Data Base to determine whether the timing of ADT impacts survival. Methods Men diagnosed with high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma who received external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) to a dose of 70-81 Gy along with ADT from 2004-2011 were included. Those who started ADT 42-90 days before EBRT were identified as having received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (N-HT) and those who received ADT from 14 days before their radiation until 84 days after the start of EBRT were categorized as receiving concurrent/adjuvant treatment (C-HT). We used the log-rank test to compare Kaplan-Meier survival curves and multivariable Cox regression to assess the impact of covariables on overall survival (OS). Results Among 11,491 included patients, those receiving N-HT were 1 year older ( p<0.001) and more likely to have Gleason 8-10 disease ( p = 0.01) and cT3-4 disease ( p = 0.002). Men receiving N-HT had a 5-year and median OS of 80.6% and 111.4 months, respectively, compared to 78.3% and 108.9 months, respectively, in those receiving C-HT ( p = 0.03). This benefit remained significant on multivariable analysis (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.96, p = 0.008). Duration of ADT was not available to report. Conclusions External beam radiation therapy with N-HT was associated with improved overall survival compared to C-HT. This study is hypothesis-generating and further studies are needed to best qualify the sequencing of hormone therapy with the duration of treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document