CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home » Gynecologic Cancers » Endometrial Cancer

ONCOLOGY. Vol. 23 No. 4
Pages: 1  2  3  
Previous Next
AREAS OF CONFUSION IN ONCOLOGY 

The Role of Adjuvant Radiation in Endometrial Cancer

By Virginia Diavolitsis, MD1, John Boyle, BA2, Diljeet K. Singh, MD, DrPH3, William Small, Jr, MD4 | April 10, 2009
1Radiation Oncology Resident, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University 2Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine 3Assistant Professor, Gynecologic Oncology, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University 4Professor and Vice Chairman, Radiation Oncology, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois

• GOG-99 Trial—The next randomized trial, GOG-99, studied 392 patients with stage I/II endometrial carcinoma who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy–bilateral salpingo oophorectomy (TAH-BSO) with lymphadenectomy followed by postoperative pelvic radiation therapy or no further therapy.[7] Patients had stage IB, IC, or occult IIA/B disease. Radiation therapy consisted of wholepelvic radiation therapy to a total dose of 50.4 Gy.

Estimated 2-year recurrence rates were 3% in the radiation therapy group and 12% in the group that received no additional therapy after surgery (P < .01). There were 18 pelvic or vaginal recurrences in the group that did not get adjuvant radiation therapy compared to three in the radiation therapy group, two of whom actually refused radiation therapy. Four-year survival rates (86% vs 92%) favored the radiation therapy group but this difference was not statistically significant.

The Options
• Intermediate-risk endometrial cancer: Options include no postoperative treatment, whole-pelvis radiation therapy, or vaginal brachytherapy.
• Advanced-stage endometrial cancer: Treatment options include chemotherapy alone, or chemotherapy combined with radiation therapy.

An unplanned subset analysis was conducted for which patients were divided into high- and low-intermediate- risk groups based on four prognostic factors: age, high grade (grade 2 or 3), invasion of the outer one-third of the myometrium, and LVSI. High-intermediate-risk patients were at least 70 years old with one risk factor, at least 50 years old with two risk factors, or any age with all three risk factors. When examining recurrence with these risk factors taken into consideration, the relative hazard of recurrence among high-intermediaterisk patients who received radiation therapy was 0.42 (0.21–0.83) at 4 years. In other words, there was a 58% hazard reduction with the addition of radiation therapy. High-intermediaterisk patients, while making up 33% of patients, constituted 67% of all recurrences. For survival analysis, the relative hazard associated with radiation therapy was 0.86 (P > .05), but for high-intermediate-risk patients, the hazard rate was 0.73 (0.43–1.26).

• ASTEC/EN.5 Trials—The ASTEC (A Study in the Treatment of Endometrial Cancer) and EN.5 trials randomized 906 patients to adjuvant pelvic external-beam radiation therapy (40–46 Gy in 20–25 fractions) or no adjuvant external-beam radiation therapy. Vaginal brachytherapy could be used regardless of the externalbeam randomization, and the total dose was 4 Gy in two fractions via high dose-rate radiation or 15 Gy via low dose-rate in the ASTEC trial—the EN.5 did not specify the brachytherapy. Treatment centers were required to decide in advance whether they would offer brachytherapy to all patients or to no patients. Brachytherapy was given to 54% of the patients in the external-beam radiation therapy arm and 53% of patients in the observation arm. Morbidity was 57% in the external-beam radiation therapy arm compared to 27% in the arm receiving no external-beam radiation therapy (no P value available).[19]

Only 92% of patients randomized to the external-beam radiation therapy arm actually received external-beam radiation therapy, and only 82% of patients received at least 40 Gy of external-beam radiation therapy to the whole pelvis. With a median follow-up of 58 months, the 5-year hazard ratio for overall and disease-specific survival were not significantly different between the two groups. The 5-year hazard ratio for an isolated pelvic or vaginal recurrence was 0.46 (95% confidence interval = 0.24–0.89; P = .02), favoring the group that received radiation therapy, with recurrence incidences of 6.1% and 3.2% in the observation and external-beam radiation therapy arms, respectively. This trial shows a small improvement in locoregional control but no survival benefit. Limitations to the interpretation of the trial include low radiotherapy compliance, no discussion of radiotherapy quality assurance, the nonrandomized nature of brachytherapy use, and significant heterogeneity of inclusion criteria and staging.

Additional Data

• Pelvic Irradiation—Adjuvant pelvic radiation therapy results in a clinically important decrease in locoregional recurrence in selected intermediate-risk endometrial cancer patients. While no improvement in survival was noted in the above trials with the addition of pelvic radiotherapy, competing morbidities in this patient population limit the power of even large studies over longer followup periods. The inclusion of low-risk patients and inadequate power may, in turn, limit the ability of these studies to detect small but important survival differences. For well-selected patients, improvement in local control may affect survival given that not all locoregional recurrences are salvaged. In addition, the substantial morbidity of salvage therapy should not be understated.

• SEER Analysis—An analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database of the National Cancer Institute was conducted to evaluate the survival outcome of 21,249 patients treated for stage I endometrial cancer between 1988 and 2001.[20] Patients with N1 or M1 disease, as well as those without pathologic staging, were excluded. Approximately 19% of patients studied had radiation therapy. Of those who received radiation therapy, 89% had external-beam radiation therapy. On multivariate analysis with relative survival as an endpoint, use of radiation therapy showed a hazard ratio of 0.45 for IC, grade 1 patients (P < .001) and 0.74 for stage IC, grade 3/4 patients (P = .009).

• Vaginal Brachytherapy—Since a large proportion of the locoregional recurrences are in the vagina or vaginal vault, some authors have hypothesized that postoperative vaginal brachytherapy alone may prevent the majority of locoregional recurrences. Many single-institution trials have shown acceptable locoregional control rates using vaginal brachytherapy alone.[21‑29] Furthermore, since the addition of pelvic radiation therapy increases side effects, it would be beneficial to limit external-beam radiation therapy to those whose risk of recurrence is high, based on the risk factors noted above.

• PORTEC-2—The PORTEC-2 trial, available at this time only in abstract form, was designed to compare postoperative externalbeam pelvic radiation therapy to postoperative vaginal brachytherapy. A total of 427 patients with high-intermediate risk endometrial cancer were randomized. High-intermediate risk was defined as: (1) age ≥ 60 and stage IC, grade 1/2; (2) age ≥ 60 and stage IB, grade 3; or (3) any age and stage IIA, grade 1/2, or grade 3 with < 50% myometrial invasion.

With a median follow-up of 34 months, 3-year actuarial vaginal relapse rates were 0.9% in the vaginal brachytherapy arm compared with 2.0% in the external-beam pelvic radiation therapy arm (P = .97). Pelvic relapse rate was 0.7% with externalbeam radiation therapy and 3.6% with vaginal brachytherapy (P = .03). Distant recurrence rate, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival were not significantly different between the two arms. Three-year rates of vaginal, pelvic, and distant relapse as sites of first failure were 0%, 1.3%, and 6.4% in the vaginal brachytherapy group and 1.6%, 0.7%, and 6.0% in the pelvic radiation therapy group. There was no significant difference in recurrence- free or overall survival.

The incidence of gastrointestinal grade 1 toxicities was 35% in the external-beam radiation therapy arm compared with 12% in the vaginal brachytherapy group. Grade 2 toxicity rates were 19% in the whole-pelvis radiation therapy group vs 7% in the vaginal brachytherapy group (P ≤ .001). Grade 1 skin toxicity rates were 6% for the external-beam radiation therapy group and 1% for the vaginal brachytherapy group, and grade 2 toxicity rates were 3% and 0%, respectively (P ≤ .001).

The authors concluded that vaginal brachytherapy should be the treatment of choice for patients with high-intermediate risk of recurrence.[30]

• Local Recurrence — Most of the above trials show an increased local recurrence rate without adjuvant radiation therapy in intermediate-risk patients. Five-year overall survival after local recurrence has been noted to range from 18% to 66%.[31-39] Of the 13 GOG-99 patients whose disease recurrence developed in the vagina alone, five had died from endometrial cancer by the time of publication.[7]

A retrospective review studied 91 patients treated with radiation therapy for vaginal recurrences at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center between 1960 and 1997. Approximately 74% of patients had stage I disease; 63% of these patients had not received radiation therapy as a part of their initial treatment plan. Of 91 patients, 80 received external-beam radiation therapy for their recurrence, with 52 also receiving brachytherapy. Eleven patients received brachytherapy alone. Local control rates were 82% and 75% at 2 and 5 years, respectively, and overall survival rates were 69% and 43% for the same time points. The local recurrence was not controlled in 18 patients, and 23 patients had treatment failure distantly as their next site of recurrence.[40]

In general, outcomes are poorer in those who have a nonvaginal pelvic recurrence. Despite the possibility of salvaging some recurrences, the treatment of recurrence carries a significant morbidity. One recent study showed an 18% rate of grade 3/4 gastrointestinal toxicity and a 50% rate of grade 3 vaginal sequelae.[41]

The intermediate-risk group thus presents a clinical challenge. Secondary risk factors including age, LVSI, exact depth, grade, and possibly tumor size must be considered when making treatment decisions, so as to balance cure and complication rates. The benefit in locoregional control with the addition of radiation therapy must be balanced with the detriment to quality of life as a result of treatment. An additional quality-of-life concern is the morbidity associated with tumor recurrence and its treatment.

Pages: 1  2  3  
Previous Next
 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.

This article reviewed

Resolving the Confusion Surrounding Adjuvant Radiation in Endometrial Cancer

Studies of Adjuvant Treatment for Endometrial Cancer





CancerNetwork on Facebook


 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
   SEARCH MEDICA RX
   Browse drugs by name:
A B C D E F G H I J
K L M N O P Q R S T
U V W X Y Z All      
   Search for drugs:
Search

 

 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Primary Care Can't Thrive Without Nurse Practitioners
Courtney H. Lyder, ND,  May 17, 2013
With a projected shortfall of primary-care physicians, it's time for alternate solutions to patient care. Nurse practitioners are one logical remedy.
VWhat Physicians Can Learn from the Allscripts EHR Lawsuit
Marisa Torrieri,  May 16, 2013
Lawsuit prompts question: What should physicians do to ensure they end up with a great EHR instead of buyer’s remorse?
Eight Ways ICD-9 Will Still Matter to Medical Practices
Brenda Edwards, CPC,  May 15, 2013
What should your medical practice do with your ICD-9-CM book after October 1, 2014? Keep it.
Seven Ways Technology Can Speed Up Patient Collections
Cheyenne Brinson,  May 15, 2013
Failing to adopt widely available billing and collections technology can cost medical practices big. Here's how to do it right.
Four Reasons Private Medical Practice is Becoming Extinct
Carol Stryker,  May 15, 2013
It’s becoming increasingly difficult for private medical practices to thrive. Here’s what’s driving the trend toward consolidation.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Skin Lesions
  • Colorectal Lesions
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • Slide Show: Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • ONS: Understanding Spirituality and How It Can Be Used to Help Patients
  • Colorectal Lesions
  • New AUA Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Screening
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
  • Genomics Studies Identify Testicular Cancer Risk Variants
  • Lower Back Pain in an Elderly Man With a History of Localized Prostate Cancer
  • FDA Approves Erlotinib (Tarceva) as First-Line Lung Cancer Therapy for Certain Patients
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Financial Toxicity, Part II: How Can We Help With the Burden of Treatment-Related Costs?
  • Patient Quality of Life Endpoints in Oncology Trials, Part II
  • Who's Coding Whom?
  • “How Do I Say This Nicely? Your Oncologist Wasn't Following Guidelines”
  • Study: Cholesterol Drugs Reduced Risk of Prostate Cancer Death
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • ONS: Safe Handling of Chemotherapy
  • Financial Toxicity, Part II: How Can We Help With the Burden of Treatment-Related Costs?
  • Conflicts of Interest in Medicine: What About Ties to Payers?
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
JOB LISTINGS

Post a job

Powered by SearchMedica Jobs


 
SearchMedica Search Result

Find peer-reviewed literature and websites for practicing medical professionals

CME on Endometrial Cancer
Evidence on Endometrial Cancer
Guidelines on Endometrial Cancer
Patient Education on Endometrial Cancer
Clinical Trials on Endometrial Cancer
Practical Articles on Endometrial Cancer
Research and Reviews on Endometrial Cancer
All "Endometrial Cancer" results


CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy