Does the New FIGO 2018 Staging System Allow Better Prognostic Differentiation in Early Stage Cervical Cancer? A Dutch Nationwide Cohort Study

The FIGO 2018 staging system was introduced to allow better prognostic differentiation in cervical cancer, causing considerable stage migration and affecting treatment options. We evaluated the accuracy of the FIGO 2018 staging in predicting recurrence free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to FIGO 2009 staging in clinically early stage cervical cancer. We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 2264 patients with preoperative FIGO (2009) IA1, IA2 and IB1 cervical cancer between 2007–2017. Kaplan–Meier analyses were used to assess survival outcomes. Logistic regress... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Mieke L. G. Ten Eikelder
Floor Hinten
Anke Smits
Maaike A. Van der Aa
Ruud L. M. Bekkers
Joanna IntHout
Hans H. B. Wenzel
Petra L. M. Zusterzeel
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2022
Reihe/Periodikum: Cancers, Vol 14, Iss 3140, p 3140 (2022)
Verlag/Hrsg.: MDPI AG
Schlagwörter: early-stage cervical cancer / FIGO staging 2018 / overall survival / recurrence free survival / risk factors / Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens / RC254-282
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-27020300
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14133140

The FIGO 2018 staging system was introduced to allow better prognostic differentiation in cervical cancer, causing considerable stage migration and affecting treatment options. We evaluated the accuracy of the FIGO 2018 staging in predicting recurrence free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to FIGO 2009 staging in clinically early stage cervical cancer. We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 2264 patients with preoperative FIGO (2009) IA1, IA2 and IB1 cervical cancer between 2007–2017. Kaplan–Meier analyses were used to assess survival outcomes. Logistic regression was used to assess risk factors for lymph node metastasis and parametrial invasion. Stage migration occurred in 48% (22% down-staged, 26% up-staged). Survival data of patients down-staged from IB to IA1/2 disease were comparable with FIGO 2009 IA1/2 and better than patients remaining stage IB1. LVSI, invasion depth and parametrial invasion were risk factors for lymph node metastases. LVSI, grade and age were associated with parametrial invasion. In conclusion, the FIGO 2018 staging system accurately reflects prognosis in early stage cervical cancer and is therefore more suitable than the FIGO 2009 staging. However subdivision in IA1 or IA2 based on presence or absence of LVSI instead of depth of invasion would have improved accuracy. For patients down-staged to IA1/2, less radical surgery seems appropriate, although LVSI and histology should be considered when determining the treatment plan.