Uterine carcinosarcomas: 8-year single center experience of 25 cases

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the behavior and treatment outcomes of uterine carcinosarcomas in relation to their clinical and pathogenic features and to determine the optimal treatment strategy. Secondary objectives were to identify parameters predictive of survival. Materials and Methods: The hospital records of all 25 patients of uterine carcinosarcoma operated between 2000 and 2008 in Gujarat cancer research institute, Ahmedabad, were reviewed. Patients who presented with clinical evidence of recurrent disease or those who had incomplete medical records were excluded from our analysis. The status of these patients was updated up to November, 2010. Patients were classified according to the new 2009 FIGO staging system for endometrial carcinoma, to see what difference the assigned stage has on survival with the old treatment strategy. Survival was calculated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared by Log-Rank test. Median survival time was derived with the Brookmeyer 95% confidence interval. For comparison of qualitative data, Chi-Square test and Fisher extract c2 were used. Results: Median age of patients was 56 years (range, 36-77 years). Only 36% of patients had stage I at diagnosis and another 36% were stage III. Most of the tumors (56%) were with homologous sarcomatous components and 64% of tumors were high grade (grade 2/3) at diagnosis. Fifty-two percent patients received postoperative adjuvant treatment. Twelve patients had no postoperative treatment: two were lost to follow-up immediately after surgery, four could not receive adjuvant treatment on account of severe medical complications and age factor which could have increased morbidity, and six patients declined treatment. Four of these patients expired within one year of diagnosis, two other within 18 months, and rest were lost to follow-up. The difference in survival of 13 patients who had taken adjuvant treatment was significantly more than the group who had not taken adjuvant therapy (P=0.025). The overall 3-year disease-free survival of 13 patients who had taken adjuvant therapy was 40%. However, these adjuvant treatment modalities had borderline statistical significance on overall survival of patients (P=0.075). The only statistically significant predictor of survival in this study was stage of the disease (P=0.035). Conclusions: This highly aggressive uterine malignancy warrants comprehensive surgical staging to assess tumor dissemination followed by systematic adjuvant therapy in patients with both early and advanced disease. The value of pelvic Radiotherapy in addition to systemic treatment remains ill-defined. Stage is the significant predictor of survival for the disease. Our results indicate that in this highly aggressive malignancy, further exploration of potential outcome benefits of postoperative treatment, especially chemoradiation, is warranted in larger group of patients after comprehensive surgical staging.

Keywords

Carcinosarcoma - FIGO staging - treatment outcome

Publication History

Article published online:
06 August 2021

• References

• 1 Brooks SE, Zhan M, Cote T, Baquet CR. Surveillance, epidemiology and end results analysis of 2677 cases of uterine sarcoma 1989-1999. Gynecol Oncol 2004;93:204-8.
• 2 Berek JS, Hacker NF. Berek and Hacker′s gynecol Oncol. 5 th ed. Ahmedabad; 2010. p. 433-4.
• 3 Sherman ME, Devessa SS. Analysis of racial differences in incidence, survival and mortality for malignant tumors of uterine corpus. Cancer 2003;98:176-86.
• 4 Schweizer W, Demopoulous R, Beller U. Prognostic factors for MMMT of uterus. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1990;9:129-36.
• 5 Ali S, Wells M. Mixed mullerian tumors of uterine corpus: A review. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1993;3:1-11.
• 6 Spanos Jr WJ, Peters LJ, Oswald MJ. Patterns of recurrence in malignant mixed müllerian tumor of uterus. Cancer 1986;57:155-9.
• 7 Callister M, Ramondetta LM, Jhingram A, Burke TW, Eifel PJ. MMMT of uterus: Analysis of patterns of failure, Prognostic factors and treatment outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;58:786-96.
• 8 Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of vulva, cervix and endometrium. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2009;105:103-4.
• 9 Chauveveinc L, Deniaud E, Plancher C, Sastre X, Amsani F, de la Rochefordiere A, et al. Uterine Sarcomas: The curie Institute experience. Prognosis factors and adjuvant treatment. Gynecol Oncol 1999;72:232-7.
• 10 Le T. Adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy for uterine carcinosarcomain a high risk population. Eur J Surg Oncol 2001;27:282-5.
• 11 Gerszten K, Faul C, Kounelis S, Huang Q, Kelley J, Jones MW. The impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on carcinosarcoma of uterus. Gynecol Oncol 1998;68:8-13.
• 12 Chi DS, Mychalczak B, Saigo PE, Rescigno J, Brown CL. The role of whole pelvic irradiation in the treatment of early stage uterine carcinosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol 1997;65:493-8.
• 13 Yamada SD, Burger RA, Brewster WR, Anton D, Kohler MF, Monk BJ. Pathologic variables and adjuvant therapy as predictors of recurrence and survival for patients with surgically evaluated carcinosarcoma of uterus. Cancer 2000;88:2782-6.