Revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging systems in gynecologic malignancies

2010 ◽  
Vol 53 (8) ◽  
pp. 669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Lee ◽  
Young Tae Kim
2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (12) ◽  
pp. 2066-2072 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver Zivanovic ◽  
Mario M. Leitao ◽  
Alexia Iasonos ◽  
Lindsay M. Jacks ◽  
Qin Zhou ◽  
...  

Purpose Uterine leiomyosarcoma (LMS) is staged by the modified International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system for uterine cancer. We aimed to determine whether the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) soft tissue sarcoma (STS) staging system is more accurate in predicting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients and Methods Patients with uterine LMS who presented at our institution from 1982 to 2005 were staged retrospectively according to a modified FIGO staging system and the AJCC STS staging system. The predictive accuracy of the two staging systems was compared using concordance estimation. Results Two hundred nineteen patients had sufficient clinical and pathologic information to be staged under both systems; 132 patients were upstaged using the AJCC staging system, whereas only four were downstaged. Stage-specific PFS and OS rates for stages I, II, and III differed substantially between the two staging systems. In both systems, there was prognostic overlap between stages II and III. Thus, despite the marked stage-specific differences in 5-year PFS and OS rates for stages I, II, and III, both systems had similar concordance indices. Conclusion Estimates of stage-specific PFS and OS for uterine LMS were altered substantially when using the AJCC versus FIGO staging system. Adjuvant treatment strategies should be tested in patients at substantial risk for disease progression and death. Neither the FIGO nor AJCC staging system is ideal for identifying such patients, suggesting a need for a uterine LMS-specific staging system to better target patients for trials of adjuvant therapies.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wonkyo Shin ◽  
Tae Young Ham ◽  
Young Ran Park ◽  
Myong Cheol Lim ◽  
Young-Joo Won

AbstractThe International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) cervical cancer staging system was modified in 2018, introducing new stage IB subdivisions and new lymph node status considerations in stage IIIC. We compared cervical cancer survival outcomes according to the 2014 and 2018 FIGO staging systems. We selected 10% of cervical cancer cases (2010–2015) from the Korean national cancer registry (2010–2015) through a systematic sampling method. We collected information using a collaborative stage data collection system and evaluated the results according to both staging systems. The log-rank test was used to analyze overall survival differences. No significant difference in survival was observed between 2018 subdivisions IB1/IB2/IB3 (P = 0.069), whereas a considerable difference was observed between these subdivisions according to histological subtypes. In the 2018 FIGO staging system, stage IIIC had better survival than stage IIIA/IIIB (P < 0.001). We observed considerable heterogeneity in 2018 stage IIIC related to the corresponding stages of the 2014 staging system (stages IA1–IIIB). The size of the primary cervical mass was related to survival (P < 0.001). In conclusion, using lymph node status to define stage IIIC captured a broad range of prognoses. The inclusion of primary tumor size considerations may improve the staging accuracy of advanced cervical cancer.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 873-878 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gloria Salvo ◽  
Diego Odetto ◽  
Rene Pareja ◽  
Michael Frumovitz ◽  
Pedro T Ramirez

Recently the revised 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system for cervical cancer was published. In this most recent classification, imaging modalities and pathologic information have been added as tools to determine the final stage of the disease. Although there are many merits to this new staging for cervical cancer, including more detailed categorization of early-stage disease as well as information on nodal distribution, the classification falls short in clarifying areas of controversy in the staging system. Many unanswered questions remain and, as such, a number of gaps lead to further debate in the interpretation of relevant clinical data. Factors such as measurement of tumor size, definition of parametrial involvement, ovarian metastases, lower uterine segment extension, lymph node metastasis, and imaging modalities are explored in this review. The goal is to focus on items that deserve further discussion and clarification in the most recent FIGO staging for cervical cancer.


2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 594-599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecilia Escayola ◽  
Juan Jose Torrent ◽  
Gwenaël Ferron ◽  
François Quenet ◽  
Denis Querleu

AbstractEpithelial ovarian cancer is the most common cause of death due to gynecologic malignancies. Most patients will be diagnosed at an advanced stage, and despite progress in both surgical procedures and novel targeted therapies, the overall survival of these patients remains very low. Among prognostic factors, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage and residual tumor after debulking surgery are the most widely reported. The current review aims to highlight the disparities in the treatment of patients with ovarian cancer and the need for postgraduate training programs in order to accredit gynecologic oncologists. Despite an increase over the centralization of these patients, many are still not receiving specialized surgery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document