ⅠB期子宫颈癌国际妇产科联盟2018新分期的合理性验证及评估

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7795.2021.06.020

首都医科大学学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (6): 1026-1032.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7795.2021.06.020

ⅠB期子宫颈癌国际妇产科联盟2018新分期的合理性验证及评估

刘洋, 吴玉梅^*, 何玥, 樊蓓, 王雁, 赵辉, 王明

首都医科大学附属北京妇产医院北京妇幼保健院妇瘤科,北京 100006

收稿日期:2021-09-18 出版日期:2021-12-21 发布日期:2021-12-17
基金资助:
北京市科学技术委员会首都临床诊疗技术研究及示范应用项目(Z191100006619035),北京市医院管理中心临床医学发展专项经费(ZYLX201705)。

Rationality verification and evaluate of the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for stage ⅠB cervical cancer

Liu Yang, Wu Yumei^*, He Yue, Fan Bei, Wang Yan, Zhao Hui, Wang Ming

Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital,Capital Medical University Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Beijing 100006, China

Received:2021-09-18 Online:2021-12-21 Published:2021-12-17
Contact: * E-mail: wym597118@ccmu.edu.cn
Supported by:
Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission(Z191100006619035), Beijing Hospitals Authority Clinical Medicine Development of Special Funding (ZYLX201705).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的从疾病特征、生存预后等方面,验证及评估子宫颈癌国际妇产科联盟(International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics,FIGO)2018年新分期体系对ⅠB期重新分期的合理性。方法参照FIGO 2018年新分期的修订内容,选取2010年1月1日至2014年12月31日于首都医科大学附属北京妇产医院行首选手术治疗的子宫颈癌患者进行重新分期,共采集到427例ⅠB1~ⅠB3期的子宫颈癌患者进行回顾性分析。利用组间比较、多因素分析等统计学方法,对ⅠB期各个亚期患者的临床病例信息包括年龄、肿瘤特征(组织学类型、分化程度、深部间质受侵、淋巴脉管间隙浸润情况)、治疗方式(术后辅助放射治疗,化学药物治疗情况)以及5年生存率进行分析。结果鳞癌、高中分化癌以ⅠB1期患者居多,而腺癌、腺鳞癌及低分化癌多见于ⅠB2、ⅠB3期患者,差异有统计学意义(P均＜0.001)。ⅠB2、ⅠB3期患者宫颈深部间质浸润率高于ⅠB1期,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.001)。ⅠB2、ⅠB3期淋巴脉管间隙浸润阳性率高于ⅠB1期,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。ⅠB2、ⅠB3期患者术后补充放射治疗化学药物疗的比率高于ⅠB1期,差异有统计学意义(P均＜0.001)。ⅠB2、ⅠB3期患者术后补充放射治疗,化学药物治疗的比率高于ⅠB1期,差异有统计学意义(P均＜0.001)。ⅠB1、ⅠB2、ⅠB3期患者的5年总生存率依次减低,分别为97.9%、93.4%、81.5%,构建生存曲线显示各组曲线分离良好,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.001)。结论 2018年新分期体系在ⅠB期中增加肿瘤最大径线2 cm这一临界值,重新修订新分期为ⅠB1期(≤2 cm)、ⅠB2期(＞2 cm~≤4 cm)和ⅠB3期(＞4 cm)能够更精确地对疾病严重程度进行分层和评估预后,具有很好的临床指导意义。

关键词: 宫颈癌, 国际妇产科联盟, 分期系统, 预后

Abstract: Objective The paper aimed to verify and evaluate the stage ⅠB of the revised 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) cervical cancer staging schema from the aspects of clinical characteristics and prognosis, etc. Methods This is a retrospective observational study examining 427 patients from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2014 with cervical cancer of stage ⅠB1-ⅠB3 classified using the 2018 FIGO staging schema. The clinical characteristic including age, tumor characteristics (Including pathological type, histological grade, deep stromal invasion and infiltration of lymphatic vascular space), treatment (postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy) and 5-year survival rate were estimated for each group by statistical methods such as group comparison and multi factor analysis. Results Stage ⅠB1 tumors were more likely to be squamous cell and well-moderate grade, whereas the adenocarcinoma, adenosquamous cell and poorly grade were more common in stage ⅠB2-ⅠB3 neoplasms (both P<0.001). The rates of deep stromal invasion and lymph-vascular space invasion (LVSI) in stage ⅠB2 and ⅠB3 tumors were significantly higher than stage ⅠB1 (P<0.001, P<0.05). The probability of postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy in stage ⅠB2 and ⅠB3 cohorts were significantly higher than that with stage ⅠB1 (P<0.001).The 5-year overall survival rate in stage ⅠB1, ⅠB2 and ⅠB3 diseases significantly different and decreased in turn, which were 97.9%, 93.4% and 81.5% respectively.The survival curve showed that the curves of each group were well separated, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). Conclusion The FIGO 2018 staging schema revised the new system to ⅠB1(≤2 cm),ⅠB2(＞2 cm~≤4 cm)and ⅠB3(＞4 cm), with invasive carcinoma 2 cm in greatest dimension is regarded as a cut off value,which provides better stratification of the disease and prognostic evaluation for patients of stage ⅠB, and has a good clinical guiding significance.

Key words: cervical cancer, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), staging system, prognosis

中图分类号:

R711

刘洋, 吴玉梅, 何玥, 樊蓓, 王雁, 赵辉, 王明. ⅠB期子宫颈癌国际妇产科联盟2018新分期的合理性验证及评估[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2021, 42(6): 1026-1032.

Liu Yang, Wu Yumei, He Yue, Fan Bei, Wang Yan, Zhao Hui, Wang Ming. Rationality verification and evaluate of the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for stage ⅠB cervical cancer[J]. Journal of Capital Medical University, 2021, 42(6): 1026-1032.

参考文献

[1] Siegel R L, Miller K D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2020, 70(1): 7-30.
[2] De Martel C, Georges D, Bray F, et al. Global burden of cancer attributable to infections in 2018: a worldwide incidence analysis[J]. Lancet Glob Health, 2020, 8(2): e180-e190.
[3] Dabi Y, Simon V, Carcopino X, et al. Therapeutic value of surgical paraaortic staging in locally advanced cervical cancer: a multicenter cohort analysis from the FRANCOGYN study group[J]. J Transl Med, 2018, 16(1): 326.
[4] Bhatla N, Berek J S, Cuello Fredes M, et al. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2019, 145(1): 129-135.
[5] Bhatla N, Berek J S, Cuello Fredes M, et al. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2019, 147(2): 279-280.
[6] National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology -cervical cancer: version 1[EB/OL]. (2020-10-02)[2020-01-14].https://www.nccn.org/guidelines/guidelines-detail?category=1&id=1426.
[7] Melamed A, Margul D J, Chen L, et al. Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 379(20): 1905-1914.
[8] 詹银珠,刘峰,刘育飞,等.临床早期宫颈癌宫旁转移相关因素分析[J].中华肿瘤防治杂志,2018,25(14):1019-1022.
[9] Kubota S, Kobayashi E, Kakuda M, et al. Retrospective analysis for predictors of parametrial involvement in IB cervical cancer[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol Res, 2019, 45(3): 679-685.
[10] Matsuo K, Machida H, Mandelbaum R S, et al. Validation of the 2018 FIGO cervical cancer staging system[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2019, 152(1): 87-93.
[11] Wright J D, Matsuo K, Huang Y M, et al. Prognostic performance of the 2018 international federation of gynecology and obstetrics cervical cancer staging guidelines[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2019, 134(1): 49-57.
[12] Diaz J P, Sonoda Y, Leitao M M, et al. Oncologic outcome of fertility-sparing radical trachelectomy versus radical hysterectomy for stage IB1 cervical carcinoma[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2008, 111(2): 255-260.
[13] Lanowska M, Mangler M, Speiser D, et al. Radical vaginal trachelectomy after laparoscopic staging and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with early-stage cervical cancer over 2 cm: oncologic, fertility, and neonatal outcome in a series of 20 patients[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2014, 24(3): 586-593.
[14] Parra-Herran C, Taljaard M, Djordjevic B, et al. Pattern-based classification of invasive endocervical adenocarcinoma, depth of invasion measurement and distinction from adenocarcinoma in situ: interobserver variation among gynecologic pathologists[J]. Mod Pathol, 2016, 29(8): 879-892.
[15] Roma A A, Mistretta T A, Diaz De Vivar A, et al. New pattern-based personalized risk stratification system for endocervical adenocarcinoma with important clinical implications and surgical outcome[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2016, 141(1): 36-42.
[16] Bats A S, Mathevet P, Buenerd A, et al. The sentinel node technique detects unexpected drainage pathways and allows nodal ultrastaging in early cervical cancer: insights from the multicenter prospective SENTICOL study[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2013, 20(2): 413-422.
[17] Eiriksson L R, Covens A. Sentinel lymph node mapping in cervical cancer: the future?[J]. BJOG, 2012, 119(2): 129-133.

ⅠB期子宫颈癌国际妇产科联盟2018新分期的合理性验证及评估

Rationality verification and evaluate of the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for stage ⅠB cervical cancer

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	王荣荣, 田俊萍. 急性冠脉综合征患者血清钙与心血管预后的关系[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2023, 44(1): 154-160.
[2]	贾静, 陈文明, 李燕郴. 多发性骨髓瘤伴中枢侵犯临床特征及预后分析[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2023, 44(1): 161-166.
[3]	于天宇, 姜世敏, 高红梅, 邹古明, 李文歌. 糖尿病肾病慢性肾脏病4期患者肾脏临床及病理因素与预后的关系[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(5): 707-712.
[4]	郭康林, 程一春, 葛树旺, 徐钢. IgA肾病国际风险预测工具在中国人群中的预测效果评价[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(5): 713-719.
[5]	谷强, 余孝君, 张津. 高龄与中低龄老年轻型缺血性脑卒中临床特点及预后分析[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(3): 474-479.
[6]	周巧云, 黄晓武, 夏恩兰, 赵玉婷, 黄睿. 子宫动脉栓塞后宫腔粘连的生殖结局分析[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(3): 490-494.
[7]	苗祖霈, 张迎花, 肖克令, 司瑾, 张浩宇, 李静. 肥胖程度对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者预后的影响[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(2): 192-198.
[8]	孙婧, 史幼梧, 贾军, 杨颖, 孙志伟, 杜丰, 余靖, 肖艳洁, 张晓东. 血液炎症相关指标在晚期胰腺癌中的预后价值[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(2): 299-304.
[9]	王莉, 张国军. 血清神经元特异性烯醇化酶与外伤性脑损伤患者及临床特征的关系[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2021, 42(5): 715-720.
[10]	金凤羽, 阮祥燕, 杜娟, 程姣姣, 李扬璐, 王虎生, 谷牧青, 鞠蕊, 杨瑜, 王月姣, 许新. 中国首个卵巢组织冻存库冻存患者特征及冻存效果分析[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2021, 42(4): 521-525.
[11]	来璇, 张爱华. 代谢综合征对慢性肾脏病患者生存预后的影响[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2021, 42(4): 609-614.
[12]	王欣, 张俊璇, 高健, 石汉平. 免疫营养改善肿瘤患者预后[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2020, 41(6): 1019-1024.
[13]	刘军, 曹庆飞, 叶雄俊, 陈伟男, 赵海岳, 佟明, 王银银, 黄晓波, 常智杰. CREPT在肾癌组织中的表达及其与预后的关系[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2020, 41(4): 552-557.
[14]	吴西抗, 王跃, 贺慧颖. 上尿路尿路上皮癌Slit引导配体3的表达与临床病理特征以及预后的关系[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2020, 41(3): 354-359.
[15]	李雪, 石中月, 杨志明, 庞文博, 金木兰. 人工智能辅助分析在宫颈液基薄层细胞学检查中的应用价值[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2020, 41(3): 360-363.