Endometrioid Carcinoma of the Ovary: A Retrospective Analysis of 106 Cases

Tumori - Tập 84 Số 5 - Trang 552-557 - 1998
Giuseppe Grosso1, Francesco Raspagliesi1, G. Baiocchi1, Emanuela Di Re1, M. Colavita1, Luigi Cobellis1
1Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, Milan, Italy

Tóm tắt

Aims and backgroundThis report retrospectively analyzes 106 cases of endometrioid carcinoma of the ovary treated at the National Cancer Institute of Milan from 1974 through December 1993. In 12 of the 106 cases (11.3%) a synchronous carcinoma of the uterine body was observed.Methods and study designOnly patients who had previously untreated disease were included in the study. Patients with synchronous tumors were staged according to their ovarian cancer and treated according to the stage of that disease.ResultsThirty-nine patients (36.8%) had stage I, 17 (16.0%) stage II, 43 (40.6%) stage III, and 7 (6.6%) stage IV disease. Moderately plus poorly differentiated tumors were present in 76 of the 106 cases (71.7%). Considering the 67 patients with advanced disease, residual tumor was absent in 27 cases (40.3%), ≤ 2 cm in 17 (25.4%), and > 2 cm in 23 (34.3%) cases. Systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy was performed in 60 patients (56.6%); selective sampling was carried out in 23 cases (21.7%). After surgery, 77 patients underwent various chemotherapy regimens.ConclusionUsing univariate analysis, FIGO stage, tumor grade, residual disease after surgery, lymph node status, and platinum in the chemotherapy regimen significantly influenced 5-year survival. However, when all these variables were included in a multivariate analysis only FIGO stage still had a significant impact on survival. Survival analysis also showed a trend towards longer survival in patients with synchronous tumors.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.3109/00016347109157288

10.1006/gyno.1993.1263

Cox D.R., 1972, J. R. Stat. Soc. B., 34, 187, 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00899.x

10.1002/1097-0142(197011)26:5<1141::AID-CNCR2820260526>3.0.CO;2-R

10.1016/0090-8258(92)90079-X

10.1016/S0950-3552(89)80048-3

10.1006/gyno.1996.0249

Dockerty M.B., 1954, Surg. Gynecol. Obstet., 99, 392

10.1002/1097-0142(19820701)50:1<163::AID-CNCR2820500131>3.0.CO;2-K

10.1016/0090-8258(89)90523-4

10.1016/0090-8258(92)90097-3

10.1080/01621459.1958.10501452

Klemi P.J., 1979, Obstet. Gynecol., 53, 572

10.1016/0090-8258(90)90263-K

10.1002/1097-0142(197206)29:6<1653::AID-CNCR2820290633>3.0.CO;2-E

10.1016/0002-9378(64)90790-2

10.1006/gyno.1995.1271

10.1001/archsurg.1925.01120100007001

Schueller E.F., 1966, Obstet. Gynecol., 27, 850

10.1097/00003081-196606000-00008

10.1006/gyno.1995.1061

10.1111/j.1471-0528.1988.tb06795.x

Tsuruchi N., 1993, A multivariate analysis. Gynecol. Oncol., 49, 51

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Tumori

Tập 84 Số 5

552-557

Thông tin tác giả