Uterine Cancer Treatment & Management
- Author: Jing Wang Chiang, MD; Chief Editor: Warner K Huh, MD more...
Preoperative Details
After diagnosis of endometrial cancer or uterine sarcoma is made, preoperative workup should include complete blood cell count, electrolytes, CA-125 (if indicated by atypical presentation or histology), chest radiographs, and any of the above-noted tests, as indicated. Also, the patient should be in compliance with routine health maintenance screening (ie, mammography, Papanicolaou test, sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy as indicated by the patient’s age or symptoms).
If the patient has specific symptoms such as neurologic abnormalities, bone pain, or respiratory symptoms, a directed metastatic workup should be performed preoperatively (eg, head CT scan/MRI, bone scan).
Other tests that are occasionally used are CT, MRI, PET/CT, proctosigmoidoscopy, and cystoscopy. These studies are more important in the patient who is medically inoperable. Nonsurgical treatment can then be individualized for these patients. An early referral to a gynecologic oncologist should be made for complete preoperative workup and discussion of extensive staging and cytoreductive surgery or nonsurgical management options.
Postoperative Details
Risk factors associated with higher recurrence risk include lymph node metastases, high histologic grade, deep myometrial invasion, lymphovascular space invasion, cervical involvement, positive cytology, and adnexal or serosal involvement.[23]
With endometrial cancer that is clinically confined to the uterus, 3 separate categories for recurrence risk exist: low risk, moderate risk, and high risk.
Low risk
Low risk is defined as grade 1 or 2 endometrioid/adenosquamous tumors with only inner one half myometrial invasion, no cervical extension, no lymphovascular space involvement, and negative findings on cytology and grade 3 with no myometrial invasion. These patients need no adjuvant therapy, although some gynecologic oncologists administer adjuvant therapy to all patients with grade 3 tumors.
Moderate risk
Much controversy and research surrounds postoperative management of intermediate risk for recurrence in patients with endometrial cancer, which includes low grade (1 or 2) with deep myometrial invasion or cervical involvement. Guidelines suggest consideration of adjuvant external beam or vaginal brachytherapy or both. Prospective trials have shown a decrease in local recurrence but no change in overall survival.[24, 25, 26]
A subset of patients with high intermediate risk has a significant decrease in local recurrence and would benefit from adjuvant radiation. This category includes patients who have any 2 of the following 3 risk factors: grade 3 histology, age older than 60 years, or deep invasion to outer one half of the myometrium.[24, 26] More recent reports suggest vaginal brachytherapy may have similar efficacy of decreasing local recurrence as external beam radiation with less toxicity.[27]
High risk
High risk for recurrence includes patients with grade 3 disease with any myometrium invasion, stage IIA or greater, have lymphovascular or low uterine segment involvement, or clear cell and papillary serous histologies. These patients need adjuvant radiation, chemotherapy, or both. While some recommend whole-pelvic radiation therapy, others advocate only vaginal brachytherapy if the tumor is fully staged without evidence of extracorporeal spread. The results of a recent Gynecologic Oncology Group study demonstrated that, while adjuvant whole-pelvic radiation therapy for patients with high-risk early-stage disease reduced the risk of pelvic recurrence by 50%, overall survival was not improved.
There will be a subset of patients who after hysterectomy do not undergo lymph node staging, either because of falsely reassuring frozen section or because cancer was not diagnosed preoperatively. Management will need to be individualized depending on grade, histology, and depth of invasion. Management may include close follow-up, returning to the operating room for full staging, vaginal radiation, or pelvic radiation.
A shift toward the use of more systemic chemotherapy over radiation for the treatment of extra-uterine metastatic endometrial cancer has occurred. A Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) prospective trial found a survival benefit for patients with stage III or IV disease with the use of systemic chemotherapy with doxorubicin and cisplatin (AP) when compared to whole-abdominal pelvic radiation (WART).[28] Another GOG trial found a survival advantage with the addition of paclitaxel to cisplatin and doxorubicin (TAP), and this is considered by many to be the current standard for those patients who can tolerate the treatment.[29]
A popular alternative regimen is carboplatin and paclitaxel, which has shown efficacy in retrospective trials, and is currently compared to TAP in an ongoing GOG trial.[30, 31] Due to a higher pelvic recurrence rate seen in the subgroups receiving chemotherapy instead of radiation, ongoing trials are studying the efficacy and tolerability of chemotherapy and radiation together as dual modality treatment.
After tumor reductive surgery for extrapelvic/advanced disease at the time of laparotomy, adjuvant/adjunctive therapy is individualized. Localized radiation therapy is administered for CNS and bone metastases. Otherwise, these patients are treated with chemotherapy and/or progestin or antiestrogen therapy. Medroxyprogesterone acetate and megestrol therapy is efficacious for those low-grade tumors that are estrogen and/or progesterone receptor–positive.
Tamoxifen is another alternative when progestin therapy is contraindicated or has failed. A 75-80% objective response occurs with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor–positive tumors compared to less than 5% in the absence of estrogen and/or progesterone receptor–positive tumors. Unfortunately, the tumors that tend to have intra-abdominal metastases are high grade and are less likely to be estrogen and/or progesterone receptor–positive tumors (15-41%). In cases of advanced disease, sending tissue, specifically from metastatic sites, for receptor analysis is useful. Metastases are receptor positive in 25% of metastatic tumors compared to 60% of primary tumors.
The major curative treatment of uterine sarcomas is TAH/BSO with surgical staging. However, a significant number of these tumors are diagnosed intraoperatively and postoperatively. Subsequently, postoperative therapy usually is necessary, although disagreement generally exists regarding its efficacy in terms of survival. At times, reoperation for removal of remaining gynecologic organs with surgical staging may be necessary. In terms of adjuvant therapy, whole-pelvic radiation or progestin therapy is recommended for LGESS only with extrauterine disease or lymphovascular space involvement. Whole-pelvic radiation improves local control for HGESS, especially stage I disease.
However, if advanced disease is present, progestin therapy and doxorubicin-based chemotherapy have a role. Because of the increased tendency for LMS to hematogenously spread and recur at distant/extrapelvic sites, whole-pelvic radiotherapy is relatively ineffective. Chemotherapy with doxorubicin, ifosfamide, etoposide, and/or cisplatin may be used with LMS. Recently, gemcitabine and docetaxel (Taxotere) combination therapy has shown promise in unresectable LMSs of different sites. Patients with MMT that is limited to the pelvis benefit from whole-pelvic radiation with respect to local control.
Those patients with evidence of extrapelvic disease may respond to additional postoperative therapy with doxorubicin, cisplatin, and/or ifosfamide. These cytotoxic therapies have demonstrated up to a 20% complete response rate in patients with advanced or recurrent disease. A review by Galaal et al pooled data from 2 randomized controlled trials and concluded that treatment of advanced stage or recurrent carcinosarcoma with combination chemotherapy (Ifosfamide plus paclitaxel or cisplatin) is associated with improved overall survival and progression-free survival.[32]
In conclusion, radiation therapy provides local tumor control but no consistent improvement in survival rates. Chemotherapy and hormonal therapy are better suited for evidence of extrapelvic spread but yield somewhat inconsistent results. For these reasons, postoperative therapy for uterine sarcomas is variable.
Follow-up
Routine surveillance intervals are typically every 3-4 months for the first 2 years, since 85% of recurrences occur in the first 2 years after diagnosis. Intervals are every 6 months for the next 3 years and annually thereafter. Each visit should include a pelvic examination, a Papanicolaou test, and a lymph node survey. Chest radiographs may be taken annually. CT scan is recommended only if symptoms arise or examination suggests a new finding. CA-125 levels are helpful if they were elevated preoperatively in advanced-stage cancers. Most recurrences are discovered during evaluation of symptomatic patients. Most recurrences in early-stage disease are at the vaginal cuff and pelvis.
For excellent patient education resources, visit eMedicine's Cancer and Tumors Center and Women's Health Center. Also, see eMedicine's patient education articles Cervical Cancer and Vaginal Bleeding.
Radiation, Chemotherapy, and Hormone Therapy
The treatment of endometrial cancer needs to be individualized depending on patient factors and disease stage. Although surgical therapy and surgicopathologic staging is the mainstay of therapy for most endometrial cancers and uterine sarcomas, nonsurgical therapies, such as radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy, play a role in the treatment of uterine cancers. However, most of these therapies are used as adjuvant/adjunctive therapy or in the treatment of recurrences or metastatic disease.
Of these therapies, only radiotherapy has any place in primary therapy for early endometrial cancer and uterine sarcomas. Primary radiotherapy (total dose to tumor of up to 80 Gy) is the treatment of choice for those patients who are poor surgical candidates. Although the survival rate with primary radiation alone is 15-20% less than with surgery, the morbidity and mortality from surgical therapy in some patients may outweigh the benefits gained in terms of survival and recurrence.
The other instance in which primary radiation is recommended is with stage III disease based on vaginal and/or parametrial extension, where complete resection of the tumor with primary surgery is unlikely. Even in this case, adjuvant hysterectomy and adnexectomy are performed 6 weeks after radiation is completed, when feasible. Treatment of clinical stage IV disease is individualized based on the disease sites. In addition to surgical therapy to control bleeding, radiation therapy is usually administered for symptomatic bone and CNS metastases, as well as for local tumor control if the tumor extends to the bladder or rectum. Primary hormone therapy and chemotherapy may be indicated with distant disease. Primary radiation for uterine sarcomas is usually limited to those patients who are medically inoperable.
Surgical Overview
For most patients, the recommended primary treatment is surgical excision and staging. Surgical staging involves abdominal exploration, obtaining pelvic washings, total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, biopsy of any suspicious lesions, and pelvic +/- para-aortic lymphadenectomy. If papillary serous or clear cell carcinoma is present, omental biopsy is also required for full staging. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) and AJCC stage classifications are based on surgical-pathological findings.
Early Stage Surgery
Many gynecologic oncologists use the grade and intraoperative frozen analysis of the uterine specimen to determine the extent of lymph node staging performed. Some oncologists treat patients with well-differentiated endometrioid adenocarcinomas of the endometrium without adverse risk factors (eg, no deep myometrial invasion and tumor size < 2 cm) by simple total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO). However, many will perform a full bilateral pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy for every endometrial cancer patient. The rationale for this more aggressive approach is frozen analysis of the grade and depth of endometrial cancer is notoriously unreliable, with upgrading from grade 1 or less in 61% and upstaging in 28% of specimens on final pathology.[18] A complete lymph node dissection would prevent the need to return to the operating room (OR) for lymph node staging or use of unnecessary radiation therapy.
One recent study found that almost 20% of patients with grade 1 disease who underwent routine staging, avoided whole-pelvic radiation based on pathologic findings. Also, a small percentage of patients with grade 1 disease required whole-pelvic radiation that they would not have received based on uterine and adnexal pathology. In addition, controversy exists as to whether lymph node sampling is adequate or if more extensive full lymphadenectomy might offer a survival advantage.[19]
Laparoscopic or robot-assisted staging is becoming increasingly common. Laparoscopy offers less intraoperative blood loss, less complications, shorter hospital stay, and faster recovery with comparable lymph node yield. Significantly longer operative times were reported. Comparable disease-free and over-all survival is seen thus far.[20] Concerns have been raised regarding seeding of laparoscopic port sites, tubal spillage of tumor, or vaginal cuff metastases due to uterine manipulation. No data are available to support an increase in these complications, but care should be used to decrease possible seeding by decreasing uterine manipulation, fulguration of tubes upon entry, and removal of large lymph nodes and specimens using endo-pouches.
Morbidity with extended staging when performed by surgeons trained in these techniques is not dramatically increased. Most gynecologic oncologists suggest performing at least limited staging for all patients with endometrial cancer because a significant upgrade or deeper microscopic myoinvasion (15% in some series) may be missed on frozen section and gross examination. However, some patients, specifically elderly patients or those with significant comorbidities, are better served by extrafascial hysterectomy and bilateral adnexectomy alone, followed by radiation as indicated by histologic factors, even in light of adverse risk factors. Vaginal hysterectomy may be used in the morbidly obese or medically infirm patient who may tolerate the vaginal approach better than the abdominal or laparoscopic approach. Recent studies demonstrate similar survival rates for clinical stage I disease.
In cases of gross cervical involvement, the traditional procedure is a Wertheim radical hysterectomy with BPPLND followed by postoperative radiation (vaginal brachytherapy or whole-pelvic radiotherapy based on pathologic results). TAH/BSO and BPPLND followed by whole-pelvic postoperative radiation based on pathologic results have been suggested to be adequate for clinical stage II disease.
Advanced-Stage Surgery
The significance and management of positive cytology in the absence of other peritoneal or retroperitoneal disease is controversial. Some evidence suggests the endometrial cancer cell in the washings without other high-risk factors, such as high grade, or other extra-uterine disease may not lead to worse outcome and may not need aggressive intervention. This may be caused by uterine manipulation or tubal spillage after hysteroscopy. Others found it to be an independent predictor of worse survival, similar to those patients with positive adnexal or serosal disease.[21]
If bulky disease is found at laparotomy, optimal cytoreduction is recommended to improve patient outcome.[22] All patients with advanced stages III and IV disease should be offered adjuvant treatment after surgery.
The role of surgery in stage IVB disease may involve tumor reduction or palliative chemotherapy or radiation. Tumor reductive surgery is typically followed with adjuvant/adjunctive chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, and/or radiation therapy.
Surgery with staging is also the primary treatment of choice for uterine sarcomas. Patients with leiomyosarcoma (LMS), mixed müllerian tumors (MMT), or high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (HGESS) benefit from total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy through a vertical midline incision, with pelvic washings, omental biopsy, and selective pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Lymphadenectomy for low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LGESS) is of limited value because the incidence of lymph node metastases is low. The difficulty with LMS and LGESS is that the diagnosis is usually made intraoperatively or postoperatively. HGESS and MMT are typically diagnosed preoperatively. Subsequently, surgical therapy for patients with LMS and LGESS is often incomplete unless surgeons comfortable with extensive staging are available. The management dilemma is dealt with in the postoperative period.
Outcome and Prognosis
Because of the typical early clinical presentation, most cases of endometrial cancer are endometrioid adenocarcinoma that is well-differentiated and stage I disease. Overall 5-year survival rates for all grades and histologic subtypes are approximately 85-95%, 75%, 50%, and 20% for surgical stage I, II, III, and IV disease, respectively. The nuclear grade is an important determinant of prognosis. For surgical stage I disease, 5-year survival rates for grade 1, 2, and 3 endometrial carcinoma is 92%, 87%, and 74%, respectively.
In terms of histologic subtype, clear cell and papillary serous carcinomas have the lowest overall 5-year survival rates. When considering all stages together, the 5-year survival rates for clear cell and papillary serous carcinomas are 51% and 46%, respectively. Endometrioid adenocarcinoma has an overall 5-year survival rate of approximately 76%. Adenosquamous carcinoma has an overall 5-year survival rate of approximately 68%.
Increasing nuclear grade is associated with deeper myometrial invasion. Deeper myometrial invasion is, in turn, associated with pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases. These are all adverse prognostic factors. Recurrence rates up to 46% are observed with deep myometrial invasion (greater than one-half) as compared to 8-13% with superficial or no invasion.
Most recurrences of endometrial cancer are diagnosed within 2 years. Recurrences in patients treated with surgery alone tend to be more localized to the pelvis (40%), particularly at the vaginal cuff. Most recurrences (70%) are associated with symptoms of vaginal bleeding, pain, or weight loss. Asymptomatic recurrences are found by physical examination, abdominal/pelvic imaging, or chest radiography. Rarely is a recurrence found by abnormal vaginal cytology.[33] These recurrences are usually salvageable with radiation therapy, surgical excision, occasionally pelvic exenteration, or a combination of surgical excision and radiation. The prognosis for these patients is better if the original diagnosis was more than 2 years before the recurrence.
Endometrial cancer treated with surgery and radiation that does recur is less often localized and, as such, is less amenable to localized therapy such as surgical excision and radiation. The most common extrapelvic sites for recurrences include the lungs, abdomen, para-aortic lymph nodes, brain, bones, and liver. Distant recurrences also present in the anterior scalene, supraclavicular, and inguinal lymph nodes. If the tumor is hormone receptor–rich, it may be amenable to progestin or antiestrogen therapy. Otherwise, the same chemotherapy that is used for advanced endometrial cancer has been studied for recurrent disease, with the same results.
Recurrence is the rule for uterine sarcomas. Stage I uterine sarcomas recur in up to 50% of cases. The overall 5-year survival rate for leiomyosarcoma (LMS) is 15-25%. Stage I LMS has a 58% and 70% 5-year survival after surgery without and with radiation therapy, respectively. Recurrences are rarely localized and tend to reappear in the lungs most often. Stage I low-grade endometrial stromal sarcomas (LGESS) and high-grade endometrial stromal sarcomas (HGESS) have 5-year survival rates of 80% and 50%, respectively.
As expected, advanced disease has a much worse prognosis, with a 5-year survival rate of 0-33% for stages II-IV. Early-stage mixed müllerian tumor (MMT) has a 5-year survival rate of approximately 50%, whereas stages II-IV have a 5-year survival rate of 5-15%.
Localized disease, pelvic or extrapelvic, may be responsive to surgical excision or radiation therapy. Although doxorubicin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin have been studied and used in treatment of distant multifocal recurrent disease, no definitive choice of chemotherapeutic has been recommended for the treatment of recurrent uterine sarcomas. Evaluation of imatinib mesylate (Gleevec) in advanced and recurrent MMTs is in progress.
Future and Controversies
Malignant cytology
Debate still continues regarding the management of surgical stage III endometrial cancer as determined by positive findings on peritoneal cytology with disease otherwise limited to the uterine corpus. Several multivariate studies have demonstrated that positive findings on peritoneal cytology are an adverse risk factor for recurrence. A recent retrospective study found that patients with stage IIIA disease identified by cytology alone had survival similar to that of patients with early-stage disease compared to patients with stage IIIA disease identified by adnexal and uterine spread. Therapy is very controversial.
Options include observation, progestin therapy, chemotherapy, or whole-abdominal radiation. However, review the cytopathology carefully before initiating any of these treatments.
Estrogen replacement therapy
The use of estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) in women with a history of endometrial cancer is controversial in stage I, grade 1 endometrioid adenocarcinoma. The results of the recent Women's Health Initiative (WHI) have only clouded this issue. Although data are limited, patients who are in complete remission or who have surgical stage I disease and have undergone optimal treatment may be candidates for ERT. The Gynecologic Oncology Group study designed to evaluate ERT in early-stage endometrial cancer patients was closed prematurely because of the fallout from the WHI results. As a result, it is hard to draw any conclusions from the limited data.
Therapy should be individualized and extensive counseling regarding risks, benefits, and alternatives must be completed prior to initiating estrogen replacement therapy. An alternative for relief of vasomotor symptoms is clonidine. Raloxifene is a selective estrogen receptor modulator, has bone protective benefits without increased risk of endometrial or breast cancer, and may be used as an alternative. However, vasomotor symptoms may worsen with raloxifene.
Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin. Mar-Apr 2008;58(2):71-96. [Medline].
Soliman PT, Oh JC, Schmeler KM, et al. Risk factors for young premenopausal women with endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol. Mar 2005;105(3):575-80. [Medline].
Walsh C, Holschneider C, Hoang Y, Tieu K, Karlan B, Cass I. Coexisting ovarian malignancy in young women with endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol. Oct 2005;106(4):693-9. [Medline].
Lu KH, Schorge JO, Rodabaugh KJ, et al. Prospective determination of prevalence of lynch syndrome in young women with endometrial cancer. J Clin Oncol. Nov 20 2007;25(33):5158-64. [Medline].
Lu KH, Dinh M, Kohlmann W, et al. Gynecologic cancer as a "sentinel cancer" for women with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome. Obstet Gynecol. Mar 2005;105(3):569-74. [Medline].
[Best Evidence] Renehan AG, Tyson M, Egger M, Heller RF, Zwahlen M. Body-mass index and incidence of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies. Lancet. Feb 16 2008;371(9612):569-78. [Medline].
The Cancer and Steroid Hormone Study of the Centers for disease Control and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Combination oral contraceptive use and the risk of endometrial cancer. The Cancer and Steroid Hormone Study of the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. JAMA. Feb 13 1987;257(6):796-800. [Medline].
Doherty JA, Cushing-Haugen KL, Saltzman BS, et al. Long-term use of postmenopausal estrogen and progestin hormone therapies and the risk of endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Aug 2007;197(2):139.e1-7. [Medline].
Gatius S, Velasco A, Azueta A, et al. FGFR2 alterations in endometrial carcinoma. Mod Pathol. Nov 2011;24(11):1500-10. [Medline].
Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Bodurka DC, Sun CC, Levenback C. Hormonal therapy for the management of grade 1 endometrial adenocarcinoma: a literature review. Gynecol Oncol. Oct 2004;95(1):133-8. [Medline].
Ushijima K, Yahata H, Yoshikawa H, et al. Multicenter phase II study of fertility-sparing treatment with medroxyprogesterone acetate for endometrial carcinoma and atypical hyperplasia in young women. J Clin Oncol. Jul 1 2007;25(19):2798-803. [Medline].
Lee TS, Jung JY, Kim JW, et al. Feasibility of ovarian preservation in patients with early stage endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. Jan 2007;104(1):52-7. [Medline].
Grigsby PW, Kuske RR, Perez CA, Walz BJ, Camel MH, Kao MS, et al. Medically inoperable stage I adenocarcinoma of the endometrium treated with radiotherapy alone. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. Apr 1987;13(4):483-8. [Medline].
Karlsson B, Granberg S, Wikland M, et al. Transvaginal ultrasonography of the endometrium in women with postmenopausal bleeding--a Nordic multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. May 1995;172(5):1488-94. [Medline].
Wang J, Wieslander C, Hansen G, Cass I, Vasilev S, Holschneider CH. Thin endometrial echo complex on ultrasound does not reliably exclude type 2 endometrial cancers. Gynecol Oncol. Apr 2006;101(1):120-5. [Medline].
ACOG Practice Bulletin #99. Management of abnormal cervical cytology and histology. December 2008.
Creasman WT, Odicino F, Maisonnueve P. FIGO Annual Report on the Results of Treatment in Gynaecological Cancer: Carcinoma of the corpus uteri. J Epidemiol Biostat. 1998;23(1):35-61.
Case AS, Rocconi RP, Straughn JM Jr, et al. A prospective blinded evaluation of the accuracy of frozen section for the surgical management of endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol. Dec 2006;108(6):1375-9. [Medline].
Chan JK, Cheung MK, Huh WK, et al. Therapeutic role of lymph node resection in endometrioid corpus cancer: a study of 12,333 patients. Cancer. Oct 15 2006;107(8):1823-30. [Medline].
Palomba S, Falbo A, Mocciaro R, Russo T, Zullo F. Laparoscopic treatment for endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Gynecol Oncol. Feb 2009;112(2):415-21. [Medline].
Havrilesky LJ, Cragun JM, Calingaert B, et al. The prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology and adnexal/serosal metastasis in stage IIIA endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. Feb 2007;104(2):401-5. [Medline].
Bristow RE, Zerbe MJ, Rosenshein NB, Grumbine FC, Montz FJ. Stage IVB endometrial carcinoma: the role of cytoreductive surgery and determinants of survival. Gynecol Oncol. Aug 2000;78(2):85-91. [Medline].
Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Kurman RJ, et al. Relationship between surgical-pathological risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endometrium: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. Jan 1991;40(1):55-65. [Medline].
Creutzberg CL, van Putten WL, Koper PC, Lybeert ML, Jobsen JJ, Warlam-Rodenhuis CC, et al. Surgery and postoperative radiotherapy versus surgery alone for patients with stage-1 endometrial carcinoma: multicentre randomised trial. PORTEC Study Group. Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma. Lancet. Apr 22 2000;355(9213):1404-11. [Medline].
Scholten AN, van Putten WL, Beerman H, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy for Stage 1 endometrial carcinoma: long-term outcome of the randomized PORTEC trial with central pathology review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. Nov 1 2005;63(3):834-8. [Medline].
Keys HM, Roberts JA, Brunetto VL, et al. A phase III trial of surgery with or without adjunctive external pelvic radiation therapy in intermediate risk endometrial adenocarcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. Mar 2004;92(3):744-51. [Medline].
Blake P, Swart AM, Orton J, et al. Adjuvant external beam radiotherapy in the treatment of endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC and NCIC CTG EN.5 randomised trials): pooled trial results, systematic review, and meta-analysis. Lancet. Jan 10 2009;373(9658):137-46. [Medline].
[Best Evidence] Randall ME, Filiaci VL, Muss H, et al. Randomized phase III trial of whole-abdominal irradiation versus doxorubicin and cisplatin chemotherapy in advanced endometrial carcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. Jan 1 2006;24(1):36-44. [Medline].
Fleming GF, Brunetto VL, Cella D, et al. Phase III trial of doxorubicin plus cisplatin with or without paclitaxel plus filgrastim in advanced endometrial carcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. Jun 1 2004;22(11):2159-66. [Medline].
Sovak MA, Hensley ML, Dupont J, et al. Paclitaxel and carboplatin in the adjuvant treatment of patients with high-risk stage III and IV endometrial cancer: a retrospective study. Gynecol Oncol. Nov 2006;103(2):451-7. [Medline].
Lupe K, Kwon J, D'Souza D, et al. Adjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin chemotherapy with involved field radiation in advanced endometrial cancer: a sequential approach. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. Jan 1 2007;67(1):110-6. [Medline].
Galaal K, Godfrey K, Naik R, Kucukmetin A, Bryant A. Adjuvant radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy after surgery for uterine carcinosarcoma. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011. Issue 1:Art. No.: CD006812. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD006812.pub2.
Fung-Kee-Fung M, Dodge J, Elit L, Lukka H, Chambers A, Oliver T. Follow-up after primary therapy for endometrial cancer: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol. Jun 2006;101(3):520-9. [Medline].
Bloss JD, Berman ML, Bloss LP, Buller RE. Use of vaginal hysterectomy for the management of stage I endometrial cancer in the medically compromised patient. Gynecol Oncol. Jan 1991;40(1):74-7. [Medline].
Chi DS, Curtin JP. Gynecologic cancer and laparoscopy. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. Mar 1999;26(1):201-15. [Medline].
Christopherson WM, Alberhasky RC, Connelly PJ. Carcinoma of the endometrium. II. Papillary adenocarcinoma: a clinical pathological study, 46 cases. Am J Clin Pathol. May 1982;77(5):534-40. [Medline].
Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Homesley HD, Graham JE, Heller PB. Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Cancer. Oct 15 1987;60(8 Suppl):2035-41. [Medline].
DiSaia PJ, Creasman WT, Boronow RC, Blessing JA. Risk factors and recurrent patterns in Stage I endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Apr 15 1985;151(8):1009-15. [Medline].
Efange SM, Michelson RH, Knusel B, et al. Synthesis and biological evaluation of radioiodinated N-2-(4-piperidyl)ethyl benzamides. Nucl Med Biol. May 1993;20(4):527-38. [Medline].
Egarter C, Krestan C, Kurz C. Abdominal dissemination of malignant cells with hysteroscopy. Gynecol Oncol. Oct 1996;63(1):143-4. [Medline].
Gemignani ML, Curtin JP, Zelmanovich J, Patel DA, Venkatraman E, Barakat RR. Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy for endometrial cancer: clinical outcomes and hospital charges. Gynecol Oncol. Apr 1999;73(1):5-11. [Medline].
Granberg S, Wikland M, Karlsson B, Norstrom A, Friberg LG. Endometrial thickness as measured by endovaginal ultrasonography for identifying endometrial abnormality. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Jan 1991;164(1 Pt 1):47-52. [Medline].
Harlow BL, Weiss NS, Lofton S. The epidemiology of sarcomas of the uterus. J Natl Cancer Inst. Mar 1986;76(3):399-402. [Medline].
Hawwa ZM, Nahhas WA, Copenhaver EH. Postmenopausal bleeding. Lahey Clin Found Bull. Apr-Jun 1970;19(2):61-70. [Medline].
Hensley ML, Maki R, Venkatraman E, et al. Gemcitabine and docetaxel in patients with unresectable leiomyosarcoma: results of a phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. Jun 15 2002;20(12):2824-31. [Medline].
International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Annual report on the results of treatment in gynecologic cancer. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 1989;28:189.
Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin. Jan-Feb 2005;55(1):10-30. [Medline].
Kauppila A. Progestin therapy of endometrial, breast and ovarian carcinoma. A review of clinical observations. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1984;63(5):441-50. [Medline].
Kempson RL, Bari W. Uterine sarcomas. Classification, diagnosis, and prognosis. Hum Pathol. Sep 1970;1(3):331-49. [Medline].
Kurman RJ, Kaminski PF, Norris HJ. The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia. A long-term study of "untreated" hyperplasia in 170 patients. Cancer. Jul 15 1985;56(2):403-12. [Medline].
Lehoczky O, Bosze P, Ungar L, Tottossy B. Stage I endometrial carcinoma: treatment of nonoperable patients with intracavitary radiation therapy alone. Gynecol Oncol. Dec 1991;43(3):211-6. [Medline].
Leibsohn S, d'Ablaing G, Mishell DR Jr, Schlaerth JB. Leiomyosarcoma in a series of hysterectomies performed for presumed uterine leiomyomas. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Apr 1990;162(4):968-74; discussion 974-6. [Medline].
Liu JH. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Hormone Replacement Therapy. Educational Bulletin # 247.
Loeffler JS, Rosen EM, Niloff JM, Howes AE, Knapp RC. Whole abdominal irradiation for tumors of the uterine corpus. Cancer. Apr 1 1988;61(7):1332-5. [Medline].
Mackillop WJ, Pringle JF. Stage III endometrial carcinoma. A review of 90 cases. Cancer. Nov 15 1985;56(10):2519-23. [Medline].
Major FJ, Blessing JA, Silverberg SG, et al. Prognostic factors in early-stage uterine sarcoma. A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Cancer. Feb 15 1993;71(4 Suppl):1702-9. [Medline].
Mariani A, Webb MJ, Keeney GL, Aletti G, Podratz KC. Assessment of prognostic factors in stage IIIA endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. Jul 2002;86(1):38-44. [Medline].
Massi G, Savino L, Susini T. Vaginal hysterectomy versus abdominal hysterectomy for the treatment of stage I endometrial adenocarcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Apr 1996;174(4):1320-6. [Medline].
Milosevic MF, Dembo AJ, Thomas GM. The clinical significance of malignant peritoneal cytology in stage I endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. Sep 1992;2(5):225-235. [Medline].
Moore DH, Fowler WC Jr, Walton LA, Droegemueller W. Morbidity of lymph node sampling in cancers of the uterine corpus and cervix. Obstet Gynecol. Aug 1989;74(2):180-4. [Medline].
Moore TD, Phillips PH, Nerenstone SR, Cheson BD. Systemic treatment of advanced and recurrent endometrial carcinoma: current status and future directions. J Clin Oncol. Jun 1991;9(6):1071-88. [Medline].
Omura GA, Blessing JA, Major F, et al. A randomized clinical trial of adjuvant adriamycin in uterine sarcomas: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. Sep 1985;3(9):1240-5. [Medline].
Orr JW Jr, Holloway RW, Orr PF, Holimon JL. Surgical staging of uterine cancer: an analysis of perioperative morbidity. Gynecol Oncol. Sep 1991;42(3):209-16. [Medline].
Parazzini F, La Vecchia C, Bocciolone L, Franceschi S. The epidemiology of endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. Apr 1991;41(1):1-16. [Medline].
Peters WA 3rd, Andersen WA, Thornton WN Jr, Morley GW. The selective use of vaginal hysterectomy in the management of adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Jun 1 1983;146(3):285-9. [Medline].
Quinn MA, Campbell JJ. Tamoxifen therapy in advanced/recurrent endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. Jan 1989;32(1):1-3. [Medline].
Reddoch JM, Burke TW, Morris M, Tornos C, Levenback C, Gershenson DM. Surveillance for recurrent endometrial carcinoma: development of a follow-up scheme. Gynecol Oncol. Nov 1995;59(2):221-5. [Medline].
Runowicz CD, Nuchtern LM, Braunstein JD, Jones JG. Heterogeneity in hormone receptor status in primary and metastatic endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. Sep 1990;38(3):437-41. [Medline].
Schwartz SM, Weiss NS, Daling JR, et al. Incidence of histologic types of uterine sarcoma in relation to menstrual and reproductive history. Int J Cancer. Sep 30 1991;49(3):362-7. [Medline].
Silverberg SG, Major FJ, Blessing JA, et al. Carcinosarcoma (malignant mixed mesodermal tumor) of the uterus. A Gynecologic Oncology Group pathologic study of 203 cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1990;9(1):1-19. [Medline].
Soper JT, Creasman WT, Clarke-Pearson DL, Sullivan DC, Vergadoro F, Johnston WW. Intraperitoneal chromic phosphate P 32 suspension therapy of malignant peritoneal cytology in endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Sep 15 1985;153(2):191-6. [Medline].
| Risk Factor | Number of Folds Increased Risk |
| Estrogen only hormone replacement therapy (HRT) | 2-10 |
| Obesity | 2-20 |
| PCOS, chronic anovulation | 3 |
| Tamoxifen | 2-3 |
| Nulliparity | 2-3 |
| Early menarche, late menopause | 2-3 |
| Hypertension, diabetes | 2-3 |
| Stage | Characteristics | |
| Stage I (grade 1, 2, or 3) | IA | Limited to the endometrium |
| IB | Invasion of less than one half of the myometrium | |
| IC | Invasion of one half or more than one half of the myometrium | |
| Stage II (grade 1, 2, or 3) | IIA | Endocervical glandular involvement only |
| IIB | Cervical stromal invasion | |
| Stage III (grade 1, 2, or 3) | IIIA | Invades serosa and/or adnexa and/or positive peritoneal cytology |
| IIIB | Vaginal metastases | |
| IIIC | Metastases to pelvic and/or para-aortic lymph nodes | |
| Stage IV (grade 1, 2, or 3) | IVA | Invasion of bladder and/or bowel mucosa |
| IVB | Distant metastases, including intra-abdominal metastases and/or inguinal lymph nodes | |
Print
