Open Access, Peer-reviewed
pISSN 2005-0380   eISSN 2005-0399
    J Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Nov;28(6):e81. English.
    Published online Sep 08, 2017.
    https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2017.28.e81
    Copyright © 2017. Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology, Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology
    Original Article

    Early-stage node negative cervical adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma show similar survival outcomes after hysterectomy: a population-based study

    San-Gang Wu,1,* Jia-Yuan Sun,2,* Zhen-Yu He,2 Qiong-Hua Chen,3 and Juan Zhou3
      • 1Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Cancer Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China.
      • 2Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
      • 3Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China.
    • Correspondence to Juan Zhou. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, 55 Zhenhai Rd, Siming Qu, Xiamen 361003, China. Email: juanzhou12345@163.com

      *San-Gang Wu and Jia-Yuan Sun contributed equally to this work.
    Received May 24, 2017; Revised July 30, 2017; Accepted August 06, 2017.

    This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

    Abstract

    Objective

    To investigate the clinicopathological features and outcomes between node-negative, early-stage cervical squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (AC) after hysterectomy.

    Methods

    Patients diagnosed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages I–IIA cervical SCC and AC between 1988 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. We used propensity score-matching to balance patient baseline characteristics. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used for prognostic analyses of cause-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS).

    Results

    A total of 9,858 patients were identified, comprising 6,117 patients (62.1%) and 3,741 (37.9%) patients with cervical SCC and AC, respectively. Compared with cervical SCC, cervical AC cases were more likely to be younger, diagnosed after 2000, white, and have well-differentiated and FIGO stage IB1 disease. For SCC and AC, the 10-year CSS rates were 93.4% and 94.7%, respectively (p=0.011), and the 10-year OS rates were 89.6% and 92.2%, respectively (p<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that age, ethnicity, tumor grade, and FIGO stage were independent prognostic factors of CSS and OS, but that histologic subtype was not associated with CSS and OS. In the propensity score-matched patient population, univariate and multivariate analyses also showed that histologic subtype was not associated with survival outcomes.

    Conclusion

    Cervical AC has equivalent survival to cervical SCC in node-negative, early-stage disease after hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy.

    Keywords
    Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; General Surgery; Prognosis

    INTRODUCTION

    Cervical cancer is one of the common malignancies in women worldwide with more than 500,000 new cases diagnosed annually and approximate 250,000 related deaths each year [1]. The advent of well-developed cervical screening programs has reduced the incidence of cervical squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) substantially [2]. However, the incidence of cervical adenocarcinoma (AC) has increased in recent decades with the increase in oral contraceptive use, obesity, nulliparity and human papillomavirus infections. Cervical SCC accounts for approximately 75% of all cases of cervical cancer, whereas cervical AC accounting for approximately 20% to 25% [3, 4, 5, 6].

    The epidemiology, clinicopathological and molecular characteristics, treatment response, and prognosis of cervical AC and SCC are different [7, 8, 9, 10]. In early-stage cervical cancer, randomized trials have demonstrated similar survival outcomes between surgery and definitive radiotherapy groups in SCC subtype, and surgery improved survival significantly compared to definitive radiotherapy in cervical AC [11, 12]. However, the treatment strategies are similar between cervical AC and SCC in the current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Gynecologic Cancer Inter Group (GCIG) guidelines [13, 14].

    Several retrospective studies have found that cervical AC patients treated with definitive or postoperative radiotherapy had a worse survival than cervical SCC patients [15, 16, 17, 18, 19]. Our previous population-based study also found that surgical treatment was associated with better outcome in early-stage cervical AC compared with definitive radiotherapy [20]. Therefore, cervical AC may be resistant to radiotherapy [21], and surgical treatment may be the optimal treatment for early-stage cervical AC. However, many of the single-institution studies included small numbers of patients. In addition, studies focused on assessing patients with early-stage disease are limited. The purpose of our population-based study was to investigate the effect of histologic subtype on survival in node-negative, early-stage cervical cancer after hysterectomy.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    1. Patients

    Patients with a primary diagnosis of cervical AC and SCC between 1988 and 2013 were included using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database [22]. We selected patients according to the following criteria: patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages I–IIA cervical cancer; patients with cervical SCC and AC who received hysterectomy including lymphadenectomy; patients with pathologically node-negative disease; those who had not received preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy. The ethics committees of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University approved this study (approval number of institutional review board, 2015J01550).

    2. Variables

    The following demographic and clinicopathological variables were included: age, year of diagnosis, race/ethnicity, tumor grade, histologic subtype, FIGO stage, and survival. The primary endpoint of this study was cause-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). CSS was calculated for patients who were died of cancer related disease. OS was estimated from the date of treatment initiation to either the date of death or last follow-up.

    3. Statistical analysis

    All statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS statistical software package (version 21.0; IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA). Comparisons between histologic subtypes in the demographic and clinicopathological variables were analyzed. Survival analysis was performed for all patients and for a subset of propensity score-matched patients. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using SPSS to create balanced cohorts of patients with cervical SCC and AC. The variables of age, year of diagnosis, race/ethnicity, tumor grade, FIGO stage, and number of removed lymph nodes (RLNs) were selected as pre-test covariates in PSM with an algorithm of 1:1 matching. The survival curves were calculated and compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test, respectively. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to explore the risk factors for CSS and OS. p<0.05 was considered significant for all analyses.

    RESULTS

    A total of 9,858 patients were identified: 6,117 patients (62.1%) and 3,741 patients (37.9%) with cervical SCC and AC, respectively. Table 1 lists the patient characteristics. Compared with cervical SCC, cervical AC cases were more likely to be younger (41–65 years), diagnosed after 2000, white, and have well-differentiated and FIGO stage IB1 disease. A total of 3,998 patients were fully matched in PSM: 1,999 (50.0%) and 1,999 (50.0%) patients with cervical SCC and AC, respectively. The groups were comparable in terms of age, year of diagnosis, race/ethnicity, tumor grade, FIGO stage, and number of RLNs (Supplementary Table 1).

    Table 1
    Patient characteristics

    The median follow-up of the entire cohort was 97 months (range, 0–311 months). Survival analysis of the entire cohort determined that the 10-year CSS and OS rates were 93.9% and 90.5%, respectively. For SCC and AC, the 10-year CSS rates were 93.4% and 94.7%, respectively (log-rank test, p=0.011), and the 10-year OS rates were 89.6% and 92.2%, respectively (log-rank test, p<0.001). However, in the propensity score-matched cohort, there was no significant difference between AC and SCC in terms of CSS (log-rank test, p=0.336) (Fig. 1A) and OS (log-rank test, p=0.743) (Fig. 1B).

    Fig. 1
    Impact of histologic subtype on CSS (A) and OS (B) after PSM.

    AC, adenocarcinoma; CSS, cause-specific survival; OS, overall survival; PSM, propensity score matching; SCC, squamous cell carcinoma.

    The univariate and multivariate prognostic analyses of patients with known demographic and clinicopathological variables were examined (n=7,534). Table 2 lists the univariate analysis results of the entire cohort. Age, ethnicity, tumor grade, FIGO stage, and histologic subtype were prognostic factors of CSS and OS; the number of RLNs was also a prognostic variable of OS. In the multivariate analysis, age, ethnicity, tumor grade, and FIGO stage remained independent prognostic factors of CSS and OS (Table 3), but histologic subtype was not associated with CSS (hazard ratio [HR]=1.146; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.924–1.420; p=0.214) and OS (HR=0.989; 95% CI=0.833–1.175; p=0.904). In the propensity score-matched population, univariate and multivariate analyses showed that histologic subtype was not associated with CSS and OS (Supplementary Tables 2 and 3).

    Table 2
    Univariate analysis of prognostic factors

    Table 3
    Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors

    DISCUSSION

    In this study, we used the SEER database to analyze the prognostic role of histologic subtype including SCC and AC in patients with node-negative, early-stage cervical cancer after hysterectomy. We found that the AC subtype was not associated with worse survival compared with the SCC subtype. The propensity score-matched analysis also showed that survival was similar between the 2 groups.

    The relative and absolute incidence of cervical AC has been increasing in recent decades [3, 4, 5, 6]. There is a potential difference in the clinicopathological characteristics of patients with cervical AC and SCC. Winer et al. [4] found that cervical AC tends to be well-differentiated, while cervical SCC features larger tumors and deeper invasion. In our study, cervical AC cases were more likely to be younger, diagnosed after 2000, white, and have well-differentiated disease, which is similar to our previous findings [19]. Due to the limitations of the SEER database, we could not obtain the lymphovascular invasion (LVI) status of the patients. However, previous studies have found no difference in LVI status between patients with early-stage cervical SCC and AC [4, 23].

    The treatment strategies in cervical AC are similar to cervical SCC in the current NCCN and GCIG guidelines [13, 14]. However, the local treatment strategies may lead to survival differences between cervical AC and SCC. A previous SEER study found that survival in cervical AC was worse compared with SCC in both early and advanced disease [24]. However, the study did not perform subgroup analysis of the effect of local treatment on survival. Several studies including ours have found that in patients who received definitive radiotherapy or adjuvant radiotherapy (high-risk factors), AC subtype was associated with worse survival compared with SCC subtype, whereas histologic subtype did not affect the survival outcome of patients with low-risk group after radical hysterectomy [19, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]. Therefore, cervical AC may be resistant to radiotherapy, and surgical treatment may be the optimal treatment for early-stage cervical AC.

    At present, only one randomized trial has shown that surgery has significantly better outcomes than primary radiotherapy in cervical AC, and long-term follow-up studies have yielded similar results [11, 12]. In our previous retrospective study, we also found that primary surgery produced significantly better outcomes than primary radiotherapy in early-stage cervical AC [20]. Therefore, survival may be similar in early-stage cervical SCC and AC after radical surgery. Several studies confirm our hypothesis, showing that there are no significant differences in survival between early-stage cervical SCC and AC after radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy [4, 23, 27, 30, 31, 32]. Our findings support the hypothesis that patients with cervical AC have distinct clinical outcomes from patients with cervical SCC following the different treatment strategies.

    In this population-based study, we included patients with FIGO stages I–IIA cervical cancer who had undergone hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy, and we ruled out patients with node-positive disease and patients who had undergone preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy. Univariate analysis found that survival in cervical AC was better than that in cervical SCC, which may be attributed to the fact that the patients with cervical AC were younger, had later year of diagnosis, were white, and had well-differentiated disease. However, multivariate and PSM analyses did not reveal an adverse effect of histologic subtype on survival. These results suggest the influence of other high-risk clinicopathological factors rather than histologic subtype in early-stage cervical cancer after hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy.

    Several limitations in our study should be acknowledged. First, there may have been potential confounding biases in this retrospective study. Second, although there was no significant difference in outcome between the 2 histologic subtypes, we were able to obtain the patterns of local and distant recurrence. Third, the SEER database does not contain information on pathological factors such as LVI, margin status, parametrial invasion, and cervical stromal invasion depth. Finally, the SEER database also lacks the details of adjuvant chemotherapy after hysterectomy, which may be a bias in our study.

    In conclusion, our results suggest that cervical AC has equivalent survival to cervical SCC in patients with node-negative, early-stage cervical cancer after hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy. Our results may be useful for improving tailored treatment strategies and individualized follow-up planning for each cervical cancer histologic subtype.

    Supplementary Materials

    Supplementary Table 1

    Patient characteristics after PSM

    Click here to view.(35K, xls)

    Supplementary Table 2

    Univariate analysis of prognostic factors after PSM

    Click here to view.(37K, xls)

    Supplementary Table 3

    Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors after PSM

    Click here to view.(37K, xls)

    Notes

    Funding:This work was supported by grants from the Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province (No. 2015J01550, 2013D001), the Foundation Medical Innovation Foundation of Fujian Province (No. 2015-CXB-34), and the Foundation for Young Scholar of Fujian Provincial Health Department (No. 2014-ZQN-ZD-31).

    Conflict of Interest:No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

    Author Contributions:

    • Conceptualization: Z.J.

    • Data curation: W.S.G., Z.J.

    • Formal analysis: S.J.Y., H.Z.Y.

    • Investigation: Z.J.

    • Methodology: W.S.G., Z.J.

    • Project administration: W.S.G., Z.J.

    • Resources: C.Q.H., Z.J.

    • Supervision: W.S.G., Z.J.

    • Validation: W.S.G., Z.J.

    • Visualization: Z.J.

    • Writing - original draft: W.S.G., S.J.Y., Z.J.

    • Writing - review & editing: W.S.G., S.J.Y., H.Z.Y., C.Q.H., Z.J.

    References

      1. Torre LA, Siegel RL, Ward EM, Jemal A. Global cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends--an update. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2016;25:16–27.
      1. Parkin DM, Bray F. Chapter 2: the burden of HPV-related cancers. Vaccine 2006;24 Suppl 3:S3/11–S3/25.
      1. Kosary CL. FIGO stage, histology, histologic grade, age and race as prognostic factors in determining survival for cancers of the female gynecological system: an analysis of 1973-87 SEER cases of cancers of the endometrium, cervix, ovary, vulva, and vagina. Semin Surg Oncol 1994;10:31–46.
      1. Winer I, Alvarado-Cabrero I, Hassan O, Ahmed QF, Alosh B, Bandyopadhyay S, et al. The prognostic significance of histologic type in early stage cervical cancer - a multi-institutional study. Gynecol Oncol 2015;137:474–478.
      1. Vinh-Hung V, Bourgain C, Vlastos G, Cserni G, De Ridder M, Storme G, et al. Prognostic value of histopathology and trends in cervical cancer: a SEER population study. BMC Cancer 2007;7:164.
      1. Wang SS, Sherman ME, Silverberg SG, Carreon JD, Lacey JV Jr, Zaino R, et al. Pathological characteristics of cervical adenocarcinoma in a multi-center US-based study. Gynecol Oncol 2006;103:541–546.
      1. Fujiwara K, Monk B, Devouassoux-Shisheboran M. Adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: why is it different? Curr Oncol Rep 2014;16:416.
      1. Gien LT, Beauchemin MC, Thomas G. Adenocarcinoma: a unique cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2010;116:140–146.
      1. Hopkins MP, Morley GW. A comparison of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol 1991;77:912–917.
      1. Eifel PJ, Burke TW, Morris M, Smith TL. Adenocarcinoma as an independent risk factor for disease recurrence in patients with stage IB cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1995;59:38–44.
      1. Landoni F, Colombo A, Milani R, Placa F, Zanagnolo V, Mangioni C. Randomized study between radical surgery and radiotherapy for the treatment of stage IB-IIA cervical cancer: 20-year update. J Gynecol Oncol 2017;28:e34.
      1. Landoni F, Maneo A, Colombo A, Placa F, Milani R, Perego P, et al. Randomised study of radical surgery versus radiotherapy for stage IB-IIA cervical cancer. Lancet 1997;350:535–540.
      1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (US). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Cervical cancer [Internet]. Fort Washington, PA: National Comprehensive Cancer Network; 2016 [cited 2016 Aug 14].
        Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/cervical.pdf.
      1. Fujiwara H, Yokota H, Monk B, Treilleux I, Devouassoux-Shisheboran M, Davis A, et al. Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) consensus review for cervical adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2014;24:S96–S101.
      1. Rose PG, Java JJ, Whitney CW, Stehman FB, Lanciano R, Thomas GM. Locally advanced adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinomas of the cervix compared to squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix in gynecologic oncology group trials of cisplatin-based chemoradiation. Gynecol Oncol 2014;135:208–212.
      1. Huang YT, Wang CC, Tsai CS, Lai CH, Chang TC, Chou HH, et al. Long-term outcome and prognostic factors for adenocarcinoma/adenosquamous carcinoma of cervix after definitive radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;80:429–436.
      1. Chen JL, Huang CY, Huang YS, Chen RJ, Wang CW, Chen YH, et al. Differential clinical characteristics, treatment response and prognosis of locally advanced adenocarcinoma/adenosquamous carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of cervix treated with definitive radiotherapy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2014;93:661–668.
      1. Huang YT, Wang CC, Tsai CS, Lai CH, Chang TC, Chou HH, et al. Clinical behaviors and outcomes for adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma of cervix treated by radical hysterectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012;84:420–427.
      1. Zhou J, Wu SG, Sun JY, Li FY, Lin HX, Chen QH, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes of squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and adenosquamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix after definitive radiotherapy: a population-based analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2017;143:115–122.
      1. Zhou J, Wu SG, Sun JY, Li FY, Lin HX, Chen DH, et al. The effect of local treatment modalities in patients with early-stage adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: a population-based analysis. Int J Surg 2017;41:16–22.
      1. Takeuchi S. Biology and treatment of cervical adenocarcinoma. Chin J Cancer Res 2016;28:254–262.
      1. National Cancer Institute, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program (US). SEER*Stat Database: Incidence - SEER 9 regs research data, Nov 2015 Sub (1973??013) <Katrina/Rita Population Adjustment> [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2015 [cited 2016 Aug 10].
        Available from: http://www.seer.cancer.gov.
      1. Mabuchi Y, Yahata T, Kobayashi A, Tanizaki Y, Shiro M, Ota N, et al. Clinicopathologic factors of cervical adenocarcinoma stages IB to IIB. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2015;25:1677–1682.
      1. Galic V, Herzog TJ, Lewin SN, Neugut AI, Burke WM, Lu YS, et al. Prognostic significance of adenocarcinoma histology in women with cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2012;125:287–291.
      1. Mabuchi S, Okazawa M, Matsuo K, Kawano M, Suzuki O, Miyatake T, et al. Impact of histological subtype on survival of patients with surgically-treated stage IA2-IIB cervical cancer: adenocarcinoma versus squamous cell carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2012;127:114–120.
      1. Intaraphet S, Kasatpibal N, Siriaunkgul S, Sogaard M, Patumanond J, Khunamornpong S, et al. Prognostic impact of histology in patients with cervical squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma and small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013;14:5355–5360.
      1. Shimada M, Nishimura R, Nogawa T, Hatae M, Takehara K, Yamada H, et al. Comparison of the outcome between cervical adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma patients with adjuvant radiotherapy following radical surgery: SGSG/TGCU Intergroup Surveillance. Mol Clin Oncol 2013;1:780–784.
      1. Seki T, Tanabe H, Nagata C, Suzuki J, Suzuki K, Takano H, et al. Adjuvant therapy after radical surgery for stage IB-IIB cervical adenocarcinoma with risk factors. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2017;47:32–38.
      1. Zhou J, Zhang WW, Wu SG, He ZY, Sun JY, Yang GF, et al. The prognostic value of histologic subtype in node-positive early-stage cervical cancer after hysterectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy. Int J Surg 2017;44:1–6.
      1. Look KY, Brunetto VL, Clarke-Pearson DL, Averette HE, Major FJ, Alvarez RD, et al. An analysis of cell type in patients with surgically staged stage IB carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 1996;63:304–311.
      1. Mao S, Dong J, Li S, Wang Y, Wu P. Prognostic significance of number of nodes removed in patients with node-negative early cervical cancer. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2016;42:1317–1325.
      1. Mahawerawat S, Charoenkwan K, Srisomboon J, Khunamornpong S, Suprasert P, Sae-Teng CT. Surgical outcomes of patients with stage IA2 cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013;14:5375–5378.
    Cited by
    Crossref 9
    Google Scholar 
    PubMed Central 5
    Scopus 8
    Web of Science 7
    MeSH Terms
    Hysterectomy*
    Lymph Node Excision*
    Adenocarcinoma/pathology
    Adenocarcinoma/surgery*
    Adult
    Aged
    Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology
    Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/surgery*
    Female
    Humans
    Lymph Nodes/pathology
    Middle Aged
    Multivariate Analysis
    Neoplasm Staging
    Prognosis
    Propensity Score
    Proportional Hazards Models
    Retrospective Studies
    SEER Program
    Survival Rate
    Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology
    Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/surgery*
    Metrics
    Share
    Links to
    Figures
    slide

    1 / 1

    Tables
    slide
    slide
    slide

    1 / 3

    ORCID IDs
    Funding Information
    PERMALINK