Serviks Kanserinde Prognostik Kriterlerin Tedavi Sonrası Erken Radyolojik Cevaba Etkisi

Öz

Amaç: Serviks kanseri tanısıyla kliniğimizde tedavi uygulanan hastalarda bilinen prognostik faktörlerin, erken dönem radyolojik tümör yanıtı ile olan ilişkisini belirlemek amaçlandı.

Gereç-Yöntem: Kliniğimizde definitif radyoterapi ve eş zamanlı kemoterapi uygulanan 26 hastanın eksternal pelvik radyoterapi ve brakiterapi öncesi ve sonrasında çekilen manyetik rezonans (MR) ve pozitron emisyon tomografisi-bilgisayarlı tomografi (PET-CT) tetkikleri ile gözlenen radyolojik klinik cevabın/tümör yanıtının prognostik kriterler ile ilişkisi retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi.

Bulgular: Tedavi öncesi ve sonrası MR ve PET-CT tetkiklerindeki tümör çapı ve SUVmax değeri ölçüm yüzde farkları karşılaştırıldığında; MR’da % 50’nin altında yanıt alınanlarda sigara varlığı (p=0,07) ve başlangıç tümör çapının 2 cm’nin üzerinde olması (p=0,01) ile istatistiksel anlamlı ilişki mevcuttu. PET-CT’de ise SUVmax değişim oranı % 50’nin altında yanıtlı hastalarda skuamoz hücreli karsinom dışı histoloji (p=0,03) ve mesane invazyonu varlığı (p=0,06) açısından istatistiksel açıdan anlamlı bir ilişki saptandı. 

Sonuç: Serviks kanserinde bilinen prognostik kriterlerden bazıları tedaviye bağlı erken dönem tümör cevabı ile ilişkili olabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• serviks kanseri,prognostik krterler,radyolojik cevap,radyoterapi

The Effect of Prognostic Criteria on the Early Radiological Response After Radiotherapy in Cervical Cancer

Öz

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between known prognostic factors and early radiological tumor response in patients with cervical cancer.

Methods: In our clinic, magnetic resonance (MR) and positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) were performed before and after external pelvic radiotherapy and brachytherapy to 26 patients who  performed definitive radiotherapy and concurrent chemotherapy. The relationship of radiological clinical response / tumor response with prognostic criteria was evaluated retrospectively.

Results: When the measurement percentage differences between tumor diameter and SUVmax value were compared in pre- and post-treatment MR and PET-CT tests; there was a statistically significant correlation between the presence of cigarette smoking (p = 0.07) and initial tumor diameter over 2 cm (p = 0.01) in patients with MR responses are under 50%. In PET-CT, there was a statistically significant relationship in patients with SUVmax change rate less than 50%, in terms of squamous cell carcinoma histology (p = 0.03) and bladder invasion (p = 0.06).

Conclusion: Some of the known prognostic criteria in cervical cancer may be associated with early term tumor response to treatment.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cervical cancer,prognostic criteria,radiological response,radiotherapy

Kaynakça

1. 1. American Cancer Society 2018, Uterine cervix, Cancer Facts & Figures 2018, page 25
2. 2. Kurtoğlu E, AG Ayşenur. Cervical cancer epidemiology, Turkiye Klinikleri J Gynecol Obst-Special Topics 2014;7(4):1-4
3. 3. Parkin DM, Bray F, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005;55:74–108.
4. 4. National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology, Version 2. 2019, October 12. 2018, Cervical Cancer, https://www.nccn.org, Erişim tarihi: 12.11.2018
5. 5. Viani GA, Manta GB, et al. Brachytherapy for cervix cancer: low-dose rate or high-dose rate brachytherapy - a meta-analysis of clinical trials. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Apr 5;28:47
6. 6. Endo D, Todo Y, et al. Prognostic factors for patients with cervical cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy: a retrospective analysis in a Japanese cohort. J Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Jan;26(1):12-18
7. 7. Wang SC, Lin LC, et al. Radiographic number of positive pelvic lymph nodes as a prognostic factor in cervical cancer treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy or intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Front Oncol.2018 Nov 30;8:546
8. 8. Asher D, Padgett KR, et al. Magnetic Resonance-guided External Beam Radiation and Brachytherapy for a Patient with Intact Cervical Cancer. Cureus. 2018 May 4;10(5)

9. 9. Balleyguier C, Sala E, et al. Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol 2001;21:1102–1110
10. 10. Siegel CL, Andreotti RF, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria(R) pretreatment planning of invasive cancer of the cervix. J Am Coll Radiol 2012;9:395–402
11. 11. Vincens E, Balleyguier C, 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
12. 12. Sala E, Rockall AG, et al. The added role of MR imaging in treatment stratification of patients with gynecologic malignancies: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiology 2013;266:717-740 13. Balleyguier C, Sala E, et al. Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: Guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol 2011;21:1102-1110
13. 14. Sala E, Micco M, et al. Complementary prognostic value of pelvic MRI and whole-body FDG PET/CT in the pretreatment assessment of patients with cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Oncol 2015;25:1461-1467
14. 15. WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. World Health Organization Offset Publication No. 48, Geneva; 1979
15. 16. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–216
16. 17. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228–247
17. 18. Schwartz LH, Bogaerts J, et al. Evaluation of lymph nodes with RECIST 1.1. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:261–267 19. Nishino M, Gargano M, et al. Optimizing immune-related tumor response assessment: does reducing the number of lesions impact response assessment in melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab? J Immunother Cancer. 2014;2:17
18. 20. Lencioni R, Llovet JM. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis. 2010;30:52–60
19. 21. Grigsby PW. The contribution of new imaging techniques in staging cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2007 Oct;107(1 Suppl 1):S10-2. Epub 2007 Aug 28
20. 22. Rockall AG, Cross S, et al. The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynaecological cancers. Cancer Imaging. 2012 Mar 5;12:49-65 23. Kido A, Fujimoto K, et al. Advanced MRI in malignant neoplasms of the uterus. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013 Feb;37(2):249-64
21. 24. Sala E, Wakely S, et al. MRI of Malignant Neoplasms of the Uterine Corpus and Cervix. AJR 2007;188:1577–1587
22. 25. Amendola MA, Hricak H, et al. Utilization of diagnostic studies in the pretreatment evaluation of invasive cervical cancer in the United States: results of intergroup protocol ACRIN 6651/GOG 183. J of Clin Oncol 2005;23:7454–7459
23. 26. Mezrich R. Magnetic resonance imaging applications in uterine cervical cancer. Magn Resonance Imag Clin North Am 1994;2(2):211-43
24. 27. Wang YT, Li YC, et al. Can Diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging Predict Survival in Patients with Cervical Cancer? A Meta-Analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2016 Dec;85(12):2174-2181
25. 28. Takeshi K, Katsuyuki K, et al. Definitive radiotherapy combined with high – dose – rate brachytherapy for stage III carcinoma of the uterine cervix: Retrospective analysis of prognostic factors concerning patient characteristicks and treatment parameters. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys 1998; 41(2):319-327
26. 29. Dubben HH, Thames HD, et al. Tumor volume: A basic and specific response predictor in radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 1998; 47: 167-174
27. 30. Teke F, Yöney A, et al. Evaluation of outcome and prognostic factors in 739 patients with uterine cervix carcinoma: a single institution experience. Contemp Oncol (Pozn). 2015;19(2):130-136
28. 31. Grimard L, Genest P, et al. Prognostic significance of endometrial extension in carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 1988; 31(2): 301-309
29. 32. Mitani Y, Yukinari S, et al. Carcinomatous infiltration into the uterine body in carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1964; 89: 984–989
30. 33. Yamashita H, Nakagawa K, et al. Treatment results and prognostic analysis of radical radiotherapy for locally advanced cancer of the uterine cervix. Br J Radiol. 2005 Sep;78(933):821-826
31. 34. Gauthier P, Gore I, et al. Identification of histopathologic risk groups in stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol 1985;66:569–574
32. 35. Wiggins DL, Granai CO, et al. Tumor angiogenesis as a prognostic factor in servical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1995; 56 :353- 356
33. 36. Yokoi E, Mabuchi S, 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. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Mar;28(2):e19
34. 37. Haensgen G, Krause U, et al. Tumor hypoxia, p53, and prognosis in cervical cancers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 Jul 15;50(4):865-872
35. 38. Grinsky T, Pejovic-Lenfant MH, et al. Prognostic value of hemoglobin concentrations and blood transfusions in advanced carcinoma of cervix treated by radiation therapy: Results of a retrospective study of 386 patients. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys 1989; 16(1): 37-42
36. 39. Delaloye JF, Pampallona S, et al. Younger age as a bad prognostic factor in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1996:64(2):201–205
37. 40. Dattoli MJ, Gretz HF 3rd, et al. Analysis of multiple prognostic factors in patients with stage IB cervical cancer: age as a major determinant. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1989 Jul;17(1):41-47
38. 41. Grigsby PW, Perez CA, et al. Adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: Lack of evidence for a poor prognosis. Radiother Oncol 1988; 12(4): 289-296
39. 42. Fyles A, Keane TJ, et al. The effect of treatment duration in the local control of cervix cancer. Radiother Oncol 1993; 28(2): 179-180