Comparison of four different treatment modalities in Stage IIA cervical cancer: single center experience of 22 years

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and the survival rate depending on different treatment modalities in FIGO Stage IIA cervical cancer. Materials and Methods: The authors identified 59 FIGO Stage IIa patients from 844 cervical cancer patients who were treated between January, 1992 and February, 2014. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed and patients were classified according to four different treatment modalities and compared regarding complications, recurrence, and overall survival rates. Results: Fifty-nine (6.99%) of the 844 cervix cancer patients were at FIGO Stage IIA. Fourteen patients received primary radiotherapy (RT), 27 patients primary chemoradiotherapy (CRT), ten patients had radical hysterectomy followed by adjuvant RT, and eight patients had radical hysterectomy followed by adjuvant CRT. Five-year overall survival rates among the primary RT , primary CRT, adjuvant RT after radical hysterectomy (RH), and adjuvant CRT after RH groups were found to be 55.6%, 72.7%, 62.5%, and 71.4% (p = 0.802), respectively and fiveyear disease free survival rates of these groups were found to be 71.4%, 88.9% , 80% , and 87.5% (p = 0.537), respectively. Conclusion: No statistically significant difference was identified regarding the efficacy and the rate of survival among four different treatment modalities in Stage IIa cervical cancer patients.

Cervical cancer; Treatment modalities; Radiotherapy; Radical hysterectomy.

[1] Ferlay J., Soerjomataram I., Ervik M., Dikshit R., Eser S., Mathers C., et al.: “GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2013.

[2] Perez C.A., Grigsby P.W., Camel H.M., Galakatos A.E., Mutch D., Lockett M.A.: “Irradiation alone or combined with surgery in stage IB, IIA, and IIB carcinoma of uterine cervix: update of a nonrandomized comparison”. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 1995, 31, 703.

[3] Garg G., Shah J.P., Toy E.P., Christensen C., Deppe G., Asaad R., Morris R.T.: “Stage IIA1 versus stage IIA2 cervical cancer: does the new staging criteria predict survival?” Int. J. Gynecol Cancer, 2011, 21, 711.

[4] Hongladaromp W., Tantipalakorn C., Charoenkwan K., Srisomboon J.: “Locoregional spread and survival of stage IIA1 versus stage IIA2 cervical cancer”. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev., 2014, 15, 887.

[5] Ferrandina G., Ercoli A., Fagotti A., Fanfani F., Gallotta V., Margariti A.P., et al.: “Completion surgery after concomitant chemoradiation in locally advanced cervical cancer: a comprehensive analysis of pattern of postoperative complications”. Ann. Surg. Oncol., 2014, 21, 1692.