Treatment patterns of FIGO Stage IB2 cervical cancer: a single-institution experience of radical hysterectomy with individualized postoperative therapy and definitive radiation therapy.

Gynecologic Oncology

PubMedID: 18774596

Zivanovic O, Alektiar KM, Sonoda Y, Zhou Q, Iasonos A, Tew WP, Diaz JP, Chi DS, Barakat RR, Abu-Rustum NR. Treatment patterns of FIGO Stage IB2 cervical cancer: a single-institution experience of radical hysterectomy with individualized postoperative therapy and definitive radiation therapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111(2):265-70.
OBJECTIVE
The treatment of FIGO stage IB2 cervical cancer is controversial. Our aim was to assess treatment patterns, outcomes, and complications in patients with stage IB2 cervical cancer.

METHODS
A retrospective study of patients with stage IB2 cervical carcinoma at a single institution between January 1982 and September 2006 was performed. To adequately control treatment variables, we only included patients who underwent their entire treatment at our institution. Toxicity was assessed using NCI Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC).

RESULTS
We identified 82 patients, of whom 47 met the strict inclusion criteria. Of these, 27 patients (57%) underwent primary radical hysterectomy (RH) and 20 (43%) were treated with definitive radiation/chemoradiation therapy (RT/CRT). Patients selected for RT/CRT had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score than those selected for surgery (P=0.037). The 3-year progression free survival rate was 52% for the RH group and 55% for the RT/CRT group (P=0.977). The 3-year overall survival rates were 72% and 55%, respectively (P=0.161). Overall, 52% of patients in the RH group received postoperative radiation therapy as part of their adjuvant treatment. CTC grade 3, 4, and 5 complications affected 5 patients (19%) in the RH group and 3 (15%) in the RT/CRT group.

CONCLUSION
Both RH and definitive RT/CRT are adequate management strategies for patients with FIGO stage IB2 cervical cancer. However, there was a subset of patients in whom RH as monotherapy was appropriate. Further studies are needed to evaluate the role of new preoperative models that will accurately identify these patients.