Stage IB1 cervical cancer patients with an MRI-measured tumor size ≤ 2 cm might be candidates for less-radical surgery

Objectives: To examine the correlation between histopathology and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measured tumor size and define whether patients with Stage IB1 cervical cancer with an MRI-measured tumor size ≤ 2 cm can be candidates for less-radical surgery. Materials and Methods: The authors retrospectively reviewed 200 patients with Stage IB1 cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy (class III) and pelvic lymphadenectomy. The largest diameter of the tumor was determined by MRI in 52 consecutive cases. Results: Regarding risk factors for parametrial involvement, only tumor size and age are known before definitive surgery without conization. Multivariate analysis of these risk factors revealed that both tumor size and old age were independently associated with parametrial involvement. Eighty-eight patients had a tumor size ≤ 2 cm and an age ≤ 50 years, two of which (2.3%) had parametrial involvement. In 52 consecutive patients, a significant correlation between histopathology- and MRI-measured tumor size was found (r = 0.787). Twenty-three patients had an MRI-measured tumor size ≤ 2 cm, none of which had parametrial involvement. Conclusions: Patients with Stage IB1 cervical cancer lesions with a tumor size ≤ 2 cm measured by MRI and age ≤ 50 years can be treated with less-radical surgery.

Cervical cancer; Less-radical surgery; MRI.

[1] Rob L., Halaska M., Robova H.: “Nerve-sparing and individually tailored surgery for cervical cancer”. Lancet Oncol., 2010, 11, 292.

[2] Altgassen C., Hertel H., Brandstädt A., Köhler C., Dürst M., Schneider A., AGO Study Group: “Multicenter validation study of the sentinel lymph node concept in cervical cancer: AGO study group”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2008, 26, 2943.

[3] Landoni F., Maneo A., Cormio G., Perego P., Milani R., Caruso O., Mangioni C.: “Class II versus Class III radical hysterectomy in Stage IB-IIA cervical cancer: a prospective randomized study”. Gynecol Oncol., 2001, 80, 3.

[4] Cai H.B., Chen H.Z., Zhou Y.F., Lie D.M., Hou H.Y.: “Class II radical hysterectomy in low-risk IB squamous cell carcinoma of cervix: a safe and effective option”. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer, 2009, 19, 46.

[5] Kodama J., Kusumoto T., Nakamura K., Seki N., Hongo A., Hiramatsu Y.: “Factors associated with parametrial involvement in Stage IB1 cervical cancer and identification of patients suitable for less radical surgery”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2011, 122, 491.

[6] Furumovitz M., Sun C.C., Schmeler K.M., Deavers M.T., Dos Reis R., Levenback C.F., Ramirez P.T.: “Parametrial involvement in radical hysterectomy specimens for women with early-stage cervical cancer”. Obstet. Gynecol., 2009, 114, 93.

[7] Rob L., Skapa P., Robova H.: “Fertility-sparing surgery in patients with cervical cancer”. Lancet Oncol., 2011, 12, 192.

[8] Subak L.L., Hricak H., Powell C.B., Azizi L., Stern J.L.: “Cervical carcinoma: compted tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging”. Obstet. Gynecol., 1995, 86, 43.

[9] Sheu M.H., Chang C.Y., Wang J.H., Yen M.S.: “Preoperative staging of cervical carcinoma with MR imaging: a reappraisal of diagnostic accuracy and pitfalls”. Eur. Radiol., 2001, 11, 1828.

[10] Mitchell D.G., Snyder B., Coakley F., Reinhold C., Thomas G., Amendola M. et al.: “Early invasive cervical cancer: tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and clinical examination, verified by pathologic results, in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 intergroup study”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2006, 24, 5687.

[11] Togashi K., Nishimura K., Sagoh T., Minami S., Noma S., Fujisawa I. et al.: “Carcinoma of the cervix: staging with MR imaging”. Radiology, 1989, 171, 245.

[12] Kamimori T., Sakamoto K., Fujiwara K., Umayahara K, Sugiyama Y, Utsugi K. et al.: “Parametrial involvement in FIGO Stage IB1 cervical carcinoma-Diagnostic impact of tumor diameter in preoperative magnetic resonance imaging”. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer, 2011, 21, 349.