Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery has no therapeutic advantages over concurrent chemoradiotherapy in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB-IIB cervical cancer

Jeongshim Lee, Tae Hyung Kim, Gwi Eon Kim, Ki Chang Keum, Yong Bae Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (NACT+S), and compared the clinical outcome with that of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) IB–IIB cervical cancer. Methods: We reviewed 85 patients with FIGO IB–IIB cervical cancer who received NACT+S between 1989 and 2012, and compared them to 358 control patients who received CCRT. The clinical application of NACT was classified based on the following possible therapeutic benefits: increasing resectability after NACT by reducing tumor size or negative conversion of node metastasis; downstaging adenocarcinoma regarded as relatively radioresistant; and preservation of fertility through limited surgery after NACT. Results: Of 85 patients in the NACT+S group, the pathologic downstaging and complete response rates were 68.2% and 22.6%, respectively. Only two young patients underwent limited surgery for preservation of fertility. Patients of the NACT+S group were younger, less likely to have node metastasis, and demonstrated a higher proportion of FIGO IB cases than those of the CCRT group (p≤0.001). The 5-year locoregional control, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates in the NACT+S group were 89.7%, 75.6%, and 92.1%, respectively, which were not significantly different from the rates of 92.5%, 74%, and 84.9% observed in the CCRT group, respectively (p> 0.05). Conclusion: NACT+S has no therapeutic advantages over CCRT, the standard treatment. Therefore, NACT+S should be considered only in selected patients through multidisciplinary discussion or clinical trial setting.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere52
JournalJournal of Gynecologic Oncology
Volume27
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016 Sep

Fingerprint

Chemoradiotherapy
Gynecology
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Obstetrics
Drug Therapy
Fertility Preservation
Therapeutics
Neoplasm Metastasis
Disease-Free Survival
Adenocarcinoma
Survival Rate
Clinical Trials
Neoplasms

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oncology
  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Cite this

@article{ee4914b5e64b4b12bfe41a0b087af942,
title = "Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery has no therapeutic advantages over concurrent chemoradiotherapy in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB-IIB cervical cancer",
abstract = "Objective: We aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (NACT+S), and compared the clinical outcome with that of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) IB–IIB cervical cancer. Methods: We reviewed 85 patients with FIGO IB–IIB cervical cancer who received NACT+S between 1989 and 2012, and compared them to 358 control patients who received CCRT. The clinical application of NACT was classified based on the following possible therapeutic benefits: increasing resectability after NACT by reducing tumor size or negative conversion of node metastasis; downstaging adenocarcinoma regarded as relatively radioresistant; and preservation of fertility through limited surgery after NACT. Results: Of 85 patients in the NACT+S group, the pathologic downstaging and complete response rates were 68.2{\%} and 22.6{\%}, respectively. Only two young patients underwent limited surgery for preservation of fertility. Patients of the NACT+S group were younger, less likely to have node metastasis, and demonstrated a higher proportion of FIGO IB cases than those of the CCRT group (p≤0.001). The 5-year locoregional control, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates in the NACT+S group were 89.7{\%}, 75.6{\%}, and 92.1{\%}, respectively, which were not significantly different from the rates of 92.5{\%}, 74{\%}, and 84.9{\%} observed in the CCRT group, respectively (p> 0.05). Conclusion: NACT+S has no therapeutic advantages over CCRT, the standard treatment. Therefore, NACT+S should be considered only in selected patients through multidisciplinary discussion or clinical trial setting.",
author = "Jeongshim Lee and Kim, {Tae Hyung} and Kim, {Gwi Eon} and Keum, {Ki Chang} and Kim, {Yong Bae}",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
doi = "10.3802/jgo.2016.27.e52",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
journal = "Journal of Gynecologic Oncology",
issn = "2005-0380",
publisher = "Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology and Colposcopy",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery has no therapeutic advantages over concurrent chemoradiotherapy in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB-IIB cervical cancer

AU - Lee, Jeongshim

AU - Kim, Tae Hyung

AU - Kim, Gwi Eon

AU - Keum, Ki Chang

AU - Kim, Yong Bae

PY - 2016/9

Y1 - 2016/9

N2 - Objective: We aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (NACT+S), and compared the clinical outcome with that of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) IB–IIB cervical cancer. Methods: We reviewed 85 patients with FIGO IB–IIB cervical cancer who received NACT+S between 1989 and 2012, and compared them to 358 control patients who received CCRT. The clinical application of NACT was classified based on the following possible therapeutic benefits: increasing resectability after NACT by reducing tumor size or negative conversion of node metastasis; downstaging adenocarcinoma regarded as relatively radioresistant; and preservation of fertility through limited surgery after NACT. Results: Of 85 patients in the NACT+S group, the pathologic downstaging and complete response rates were 68.2% and 22.6%, respectively. Only two young patients underwent limited surgery for preservation of fertility. Patients of the NACT+S group were younger, less likely to have node metastasis, and demonstrated a higher proportion of FIGO IB cases than those of the CCRT group (p≤0.001). The 5-year locoregional control, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates in the NACT+S group were 89.7%, 75.6%, and 92.1%, respectively, which were not significantly different from the rates of 92.5%, 74%, and 84.9% observed in the CCRT group, respectively (p> 0.05). Conclusion: NACT+S has no therapeutic advantages over CCRT, the standard treatment. Therefore, NACT+S should be considered only in selected patients through multidisciplinary discussion or clinical trial setting.

AB - Objective: We aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (NACT+S), and compared the clinical outcome with that of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) IB–IIB cervical cancer. Methods: We reviewed 85 patients with FIGO IB–IIB cervical cancer who received NACT+S between 1989 and 2012, and compared them to 358 control patients who received CCRT. The clinical application of NACT was classified based on the following possible therapeutic benefits: increasing resectability after NACT by reducing tumor size or negative conversion of node metastasis; downstaging adenocarcinoma regarded as relatively radioresistant; and preservation of fertility through limited surgery after NACT. Results: Of 85 patients in the NACT+S group, the pathologic downstaging and complete response rates were 68.2% and 22.6%, respectively. Only two young patients underwent limited surgery for preservation of fertility. Patients of the NACT+S group were younger, less likely to have node metastasis, and demonstrated a higher proportion of FIGO IB cases than those of the CCRT group (p≤0.001). The 5-year locoregional control, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates in the NACT+S group were 89.7%, 75.6%, and 92.1%, respectively, which were not significantly different from the rates of 92.5%, 74%, and 84.9% observed in the CCRT group, respectively (p> 0.05). Conclusion: NACT+S has no therapeutic advantages over CCRT, the standard treatment. Therefore, NACT+S should be considered only in selected patients through multidisciplinary discussion or clinical trial setting.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978416156&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84978416156&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3802/jgo.2016.27.e52

DO - 10.3802/jgo.2016.27.e52

M3 - Article

C2 - 27329200

AN - SCOPUS:84978416156

VL - 27

JO - Journal of Gynecologic Oncology

JF - Journal of Gynecologic Oncology

SN - 2005-0380

IS - 5

M1 - e52

ER -