Article Data

  • Views 227
  • Dowloads 159

Original Research

Open Access

Importance of radiographic tumor regression during radiotherapy in squamous cell versus adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix as assessed by MRI and cone beam CT

  • Christopher R. Weil1,*,†,
  • Fadi Haroun2,†
  • Kevin Guo3
  • Ryan D. Kraus1
  • Zhao Hui1
  • Lindsay M. Burt1
  • Gita Suneja1
  • Cristina M. DeCesaris1
  • Y. Jessica Huang1
  • David K. Gaffney1

1Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Hospital, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA

2University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA

3University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA

DOI: 10.22514/ejgo.2023.008 Vol.44,Issue 1,February 2023 pp.68-78

Submitted: 01 November 2022 Accepted: 08 December 2022

Published: 15 February 2023

*Corresponding Author(s): Christopher R. Weil E-mail: chris.weil@hci.utah.edu

† These authors contributed equally.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the kinetics of tumor regression in cervical squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (AC) using computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and to correlate rate of regression and residual tumor with progression and survival. Thirty-two patients with stage IB2-IVA cervical cancer were randomly selected from an institutional database with a 2:1 ratio of SCC to AC. All available on-treatment weekly cone beam CT (CBCT) and pre- and post-external beam MRIs were utilized to generate largest two-dimensional area of tumor and tumor gross tumor volumes (GTV), respectively. Tumor volume regression velocity and percent residual tumor were correlated to 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) using threshold regression modeling. Kaplan-Meier and Fine-Grey estimators were used for survival and cumulative incidence analysis, respectively. With a median follow-up of 2.9 years, 32 patients were included, 22 (69%) with SCC and 10 (31%) with AC. All received concurrent chemoradiation followed by brachytherapy. The 2-year cumulative incidence (CI) of local progression for both SCC and AC was 10%, and 2-year CI of distant progression was 9% vs. 57% (p = 0.02). Deaths occurred in 3/22 (14%) with SCC and 7/10 (70%) with AC, with a 2-year DSS of 90% versus 60%, respectively. Extent and rate of regression on CBCTs were not correlated with progression or survival; however, consistent rates of tumor regression for both SCC and AC. Thresholds of ≥20% residual disease on post-external beam pre-brachytherapy MRI and regression velocity ≤1.8%/day were associated with worse PFS and DSS. This study showed cervical AC is associated with higher rates of distant progression and worse overall survival than SCC. Cervical AC tends to have a higher initial and residual tumor burden. Our identified thresholds of ≥20% residual tumor and tumor regression of ≤1.8%/day may help identify cases warranting dose escalation.


Keywords

Cervical cancer; Squamous cell carcinoma; Adenocarcinoma; Tumor regression; Residual tumor; Radiotherapy; Radiation therapy


Cite and Share

Christopher R. Weil,Fadi Haroun,Kevin Guo,Ryan D. Kraus,Zhao Hui,Lindsay M. Burt,Gita Suneja,Cristina M. DeCesaris,Y. Jessica Huang,David K. Gaffney. Importance of radiographic tumor regression during radiotherapy in squamous cell versus adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix as assessed by MRI and cone beam CT. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2023. 44(1);68-78.

References

[1] Yokoi E, Mabuchi S, Takahashi R, Matsumoto Y, Kuroda H, Kozasa K, et al. Impact of histological subtype on survival in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer that were treated with definitive radiotherapy: adenocarcinoma/adenosquamous carcinoma versus squamous cell carcinoma. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2017; 28: e19.

[2] Liu P, Ji M, Kong Y, Huo Z, Lv Q, Xie Q, et al. Comparison of survival outcomes between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma/adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix after radical radiotherapy and chemotherapy. BMC Cancer. 2022; 22: 326.

[3] Hu K, Wang W, Liu X, Meng Q, Zhang F. Comparison of treatment outcomes between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of cervix after definitive radiotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Radiation Oncology. 2018; 13: 249.

[4] Beadle BM, Jhingran A, Salehpour M, Sam M, Iyer RB, Eifel PJ. Cervix regression and motion during the course of external beam chemoradiation for cervical cancer. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2009; 73: 235–241.

[5] Lee CM, Shrieve DC, Gaffney DK. Rapid involution and mobility of carcinoma of the cervix. International Journal of Radiation Oncolog, Biology, Physics. 2004; 58: 625–630.

[6] Mayr NA, Taoka T, Yuh WTC, Denning LM, Zhen WK, Paulino AC, et al. Method and timing of tumor volume measurement for outcome prediction in cervical cancer using magnetic resonance imaging. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2002; 52: 14–22.

[7] Nam SE, Lim W, Jeong J, Lee S, Choi J, Park H, et al. The prognostic significance of preoperative tumor marker (CEA, CA15-3) elevation in breast cancer patients: data from the Korean Breast Cancer Society Registry. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2019; 177: 669–678.

[8] Lin LL, Yang Z, Mutic S, Miller TR, Grigsby PW. FDG-PET imaging for the assessment of physiologic volume response during radiotherapy in cervix cancer. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2006; 65: 177–181.

[9] Anker CJ, Cachoeira CV, Boucher KM, Rankin J, Gaffney DK. Does the entire uterus need to be treated in cancer of the cervix? Role of adaptive brachytherapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2010; 76: 704–712.

[10] Rose PG, Java JJ, Whitney CW, Stehman FB, Lanciano R, Thomas GM. Locally advanced adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinomas of the cervix compared to squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix in Gynecologic Oncology Group trials of cisplatin-based chemoradiation. Gynecologic Oncology. 2014; 135: 208–212.

[11] Thiruthaneeswaran N, Groom N, Lowe G, Bryant L, Hoskin PJ. Focal boost to residual gross tumor volume in brachytherapy for cervical cancer—a feasibility study. Brachytherapy. 2018; 17: 181–186.

[12] Schernberg A, Bockel S, Annede P, Fumagalli I, Escande A, Mignot F, et al. Tumor shrinkage during chemoradiation in locally advanced cervical cancer patients: prognostic significance, and impact for image-guided adaptive brachytherapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2018; 102: 362–372.

[13] Mayr NA, Wang JZ, Lo SS, Zhang D, Grecula JC, Lu L, et al. Translating response during therapy into ultimate treatment outcome: a personalized 4- dimensional MRI tumor volumetric regression approach in cervical cancer. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2010; 76: 719–727.

[14] Huang Z, Mayr NA, Yuh WTC, Lo SS, Montebello JF, Grecula JC, et al. Predicting outcomes in cervical cancer: a kinetic model of tumor regression during radiation therapy. Cancer Research. 2010; 70: 463–470.

[15] Wang JZ, Mayr NA, Zhang D, Li K, Grecula JC, Montebello JF, et al. Sequential magnetic resonance imaging of cervical cancer: the predictive value of absolute tumor volume and regression ratio measured before, during, and after radiation therapy. Cancer. 2010; 116: 5093–5101.

[16] Vincens E, Balleyguier C, Rey A, Uzan C, Zareski E, Gouy S, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in predicting residual disease in patients treated for stage IB2/II cervical carcinoma with chemoradiation therapy: correlation of radiologic findings with surgicopathologic results. Cancer. 2008; 113: 2158–2165.

[17] Touboul C, Uzan C, Mauguen A, Gouy S, Rey A, Pautier P, et al. Prognostic factors and morbidities after completion surgery in patients undergoing initial chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. The Oncologist. 2010; 15: 405–415.

[18] Tsuruoka S, Kataoka M, Hamamoto Y, Tokumasu A, Uwatsu K, Kanzaki H, et al. Tumor growth patterns on magnetic resonance imaging and treatment outcomes in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy. International Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2019; 24: 1119–1128.

[19] Minkoff D, Gill BS, Kang J, Beriwal S. Cervical cancer outcome prediction to high-dose rate brachytherapy using quantitative magnetic resonance imaging analysis of tumor response to external beam radiotherapy. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 2015; 115: 78–83.

[20] Klopp AH, Moughan J, Portelance L, Miller BE, Salehpour MR, Hildebrandt E, et al. Hematologic toxicity in RTOG 0418: a phase 2 study of postoperative IMRT for gynecologic cancer. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2013; 86: 83–90.

[21] Klopp AH, Yeung AR, Deshmukh S, Gil KM, Wenzel L, Westin SN, et al. Patient-reported toxicity during pelvic intensity-modulated radiation therapy: NRG Oncology-RTOG 1203. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2018; 36: 2538–2544.

[22] Yeung AR, Pugh SL, Klopp AH, Gil KM, Wenzel L, Westin SN, et al. Improvement in patient-reported outcomes with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (RT) compared with standard RT: a report from the NRG oncology RTOG 1203 study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2020; 38: 1685–1692.

[23] Eifel PJ, Morris M, Wharton JT, Oswald MJ. The influence of tumor size and morphology on the outcome of patients with FIGO stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 1994; 29: 9–16.

[24] Kovalic JJ, Perez CA, Grigsby PW, Lockett MA. The effect of volume of disease in patients with carcinoma of the uterine cervix. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 1991; 21: 905–910.

[25] Mayr NA, Yuh WT, Zheng J, Ehrhardt JC, Sorosky JI, Magnotta VA, et al. Tumor size evaluated by pelvic examination compared with 3-D quantitative analysis in the prediction of outcome for cervical cancer. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 1997; 39: 395–404.

[26] Mitchell DG, 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. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2006; 24: 5687–5694.

[27] Wagenaar HC, Trimbos JB, Postema S, Anastasopoulou A, van der Geest RJ, Reiber JH, et al. Tumor diameter and volume assessed by magnetic resonance imaging in the prediction of outcome for invasive cervical cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2001; 82: 474–482.

[28] Ohara K, Oki A, Tanaka YO, Onishi K, Fukumitsu N, Hashimoto T, et al. Early determination of uterine cervical squamous cell carcinoma radioresponse identifies high- and low-response tumors. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2006; 64: 1179–1182.

[29] Hatano K, Sekiya Y, Araki H, Sakai M, Togawa T, Narita Y, et al. Evaluation of the therapeutic effect of radiotherapy on cervical cancer using magnetic resonance imaging. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 1999; 45: 639–644.

[30] Mongula JE, Slangen BFM, Lambregts DMJ, Cellini F, Bakers FCH, Lutgens LCHW, et al. Consecutive magnetic resonance imaging during brachytherapy for cervical carcinoma: predictive value of volume measurements with respect to persistent disease and prognosis. Radiation Oncology. 2015; 10: 252.

[31] Pötter R, Tanderup K, Schmid MP, Jürgenliemk-Schulz I, Haie-Meder C, Fokdal LU, et al. MRI-guided adaptive brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer (EMBRACE-I): a multicentre prospective cohort study. The Lancet Oncology. 2021; 22: 538–547.

[32] Pötter R, Tanderup K, Kirisits C, de Leeuw A, Kirchheiner K, Nout R, et al. The EMBRACE II study: the outcome and prospect of two decades of evolution within the GEC-ESTRO GYN working group and the EMBRACE studies. Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology. 2018; 9: 48–60.

[33] Kato S, Ohno T, Tsujii H, Nakano T, Mizoe J, Kamada T, et al. Dose escalation study of carbon ion radiotherapy for locally advanced carcinoma of the uterine cervix. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2006; 65: 388–397.

[34] Nakano T, Suzuki M, Abe A, Suzuki Y, Morita S, Mizoe J, et al. The phase I/II clinical study of carbon ion therapy for cancer of the uterine cervix. The Cancer Journal from Scientific American. 1999; 5: 362–369.

[35] Okonogi N, Wakatsuki M, Kato S, Karasawa K, Kiyohara H, Shiba S, et al. Clinical outcomes of carbon ion radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy for locally advanced uterine cervical adenocarcinoma in a phase 1/2 clinical trial (protocol 1001). Cancer Medicine. 2018; 7: 351–359.

[36] Shiba S, Wakatsuki M, Kato S, Ohno T, Okonogi N, Karasawa K, et al. Carbon-ion radiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer with bladder invasion. Journal of Radiation Research. 2016; 57: 684–690.

[37] Wakatsuki M, Kato S, Kiyohara H, Ohno T, Karasawa K, Tamaki T, et al. Clinical trial of prophylactic extended-field carbon-ion radiotherapy for locally advanced uterine cervical cancer (protocol 0508). PLoS One. 2015; 10: e0127587.

[38] Wakatsuki M, Kato S, Ohno T, Karasawa K, Ando K, Kiyohara H, et al. Dose-escalation study of carbon ion radiotherapy for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix (9902). Gynecologic Oncology. 2014; 132: 87–92.

[39] Wakatsuki M, Kato S, Ohno T, Karasawa K, Kiyohara H, Tamaki T, et al. Clinical outcomes of carbon ion radiotherapy for locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix in phase 1/2 clinical trial (protocol 9704). Cancer. 2014; 120: 1663–1669.

[40] Wakatsuki M, Kato S, Ohno T, Kiyohara H, Karasawa K, Tamaki T, et al. Difference in distant failure site between locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix after C-ion RT. Journal of Radiation Research. 2015; 56: 523–528.

[41] Mileshkin LR, Moore KN, Barnes E, Gebski V, Narayan K, Bradshaw N, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy following chemoradiation as primary treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer compared to chemoradiation alone: the randomized phase III OUTBACK trial (ANZGOG 0902, RTOG 1174, NRG 0274). Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2021; 39: LBA3.

[42] Xing B, Guo J, Sheng Y, Wu G, Zhao Y. Human papillomavirus-negative cervical cancer: a comprehensive review. Frontiers in Oncology. 2020; 10: 606335.

[43] Fernandes A, Viveros-Carreño D, Hoegl J, Ávila M, Pareja R. Human papillomavirus-independent cervical cancer. International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer. 2022; 32: 1–7.

[44] Thomas M, Borggreve AS, van Rossum PSN, Perneel C, Moons J, Van Daele E, et al. Radiation dose and pathological response in oesophageal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery: a multi-institutional analysis. Acta Oncologica. 2019; 58: 1358–1365.

[45] van Hagen P, Hulshof MCCM, van Lanschot JJB, Steyerberg EW, Henegouwen MIVB, Wijnhoven BPL, et al. Preoperative chemoradio-therapy for esophageal or junctional cancer. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2012; 366: 2074–2084.

[46] Nomori H, Shiraishi A, Honma K, Shoji K, Otsuki A, Cong Y, et al. Differences between lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma in histological distribution of residual tumor after induction chemoradiotherapy. Discover Oncology. 2021; 12: 36.

[47] Fyles A, Keane TJ, Barton M, Simm J. The effect of treatment duration in the local control of cervix cancer. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 1992; 25: 273–279.


Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top