Incidence and Predictors of Peritoneal Metastases of Gynecological Origin: a Population-Based Study in the Netherlands
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
J Gynecol Oncol. 2020 Sep;31(5):e58 https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2020.31.e58 pISSN 2005-0380·eISSN 2005-0399 Original Article Incidence and predictors of peritoneal metastases of gynecological origin: a population-based study in the Netherlands Lara Burg ,1 Maite Timmermans ,2,3,4 Maaike van der Aa ,2 Dorry Boll ,5 Koen Rovers ,6 Ignace de Hingh ,6 Anne van Altena 1 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands 2Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands Received: Dec 10, 2018 3Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands Revised: Mar 19, 2020 4GROW, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, The Netherlands Accepted: Mar 22, 2020 5Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands 6Department of Surgical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands Correspondence to Lara Burg Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert ABSTRACT Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Objective: Peritoneal metastases (PM) are a challenge in gynecological cancers, but its E-mail: [email protected] appearance has never been described in a population-based study. Therefore, we describe the Copyright © 2020. Asian Society of incidence of PM and identify predictors that increase the probability of peritoneal spread. Gynecologic Oncology, Korean Society of Methods: All ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancer patients diagnosed in the Netherlands Gynecologic Oncology, and Japan Society of between 1989 and 2015 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and stratified Gynecologic Oncology This is an Open Access article distributed for PM. Crude and age-adjusted incidence over time was calculated. Independent predictors under the terms of the Creative Commons for PM were identified using uni- and multivariable analyses. Attribution Non-Commercial License (https:// Results: The 94,981 patients were diagnosed with ovarian, endometrial or cervical creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) cancer and respectively 61%, 2% and 1% presented with PM. Predictors for PM in ovarian which permits unrestricted non-commercial cancer were: age between 50 and 74 years (odds ratio [OR]=1.19; 95% confidence interval use, distribution, and reproduction in any [CI]=1.08–1.32), other distant metastases (OR=1.25; 95% CI=1.10–1.41), poor differentiation medium, provided the original work is properly cited. grade (OR=2.00; 95% CI=1.73–2.32) and serous histology. Predictors in endometrial cancer were lymph node metastases (OR=2.32; 95% CI=1.65–3.26), other distant metastases ORCID iDs (OR=1.38; 95% CI=1.08–1.77), high-grade tumors (OR=1.95; 95% CI=1.38–2.76) and clear Lara Burg cell (OR=1.49; 95% CI=1.04–2.13) or serous histology (OR=2.71; 95% CI=2.15–3.42). In https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4852-2118 Maite Timmermans cervical cancer, the risk is higher in adenocarcinoma than in squamous cell carcinoma https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9119-8328 (OR=4.92; 95% CI=3.11–7.79). Maaike van der Aa Conclusion: PM are frequently seen in patients with ovarian cancer. In endometrial and https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2934-2704 cervical cancer PM are rare. Histological subtype was the strongest predictive factor for PM Dorry Boll in all 3 cancers. Better understanding of predictive factors for PM and thus the biological https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5339-8505 behavior is of paramount importance. Koen Rovers https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8174-2134 Keywords: Peritoneal Neoplasms; Ovarian Neoplasms; Endometrial Neoplasms; Ignace de Hingh https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3491-4268 Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Incidence; Epidemiology Anne van Altena https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2598-087X https://ejgo.org 1/12 Incidence and predictors of peritoneal metastases Presentation INTRODUCTION Poster presentation at the 17th Biennial Meeting of the International Gynecologic In 2015, over 4,000 women in the Netherlands were diagnosed with ovarian, endometrial Cancer Society (IGCS 2018). Kyoto, Japan, September 14–16, 2018. or cervical cancer [1]. Ovarian cancer is known to present with peritoneal metastases (PM) already at the time of diagnosis in a considerable number of patients. Due to the advanced Conflict of Interest stage at diagnosis it is associated with an impaired clinical outcome [2-4]: the overall 5-year No potential conflict of interest relevant to this survival rate is less than 30% [3-6]. In cervical and endometrial cancer, PM are less often article was reported. reported [7,8]. Author Contributions Conceptualization: V.A.A., B.D., B.L.; Data A better understanding of the biological behavior of gynecological cancers is of paramount curation: T.M., V.D.A.M.; Formal analysis: importance to improve treatment strategies. Analyzing the pattern of metastasis in T.M., R.K., B.L.; Methodology: T.M., R.K., B.L.; gynecological cancers and the predictive factors for having PM can contribute to the Software: T.M., R.K., B.L.; Validation: V.D.A.M.; Visualization: B.L.; Writing - original draft: B.L.; clarification of this behavior. Until recently, gynecological cancer patients were treated Writing - review & editing: T.M., V.D.A.M., B.D., according to the origin of the gynecological tumor, independent of other factors like R.K., D.H.I., V.A.A. histological type. Nowadays more attention is given to the differences between the histological subtypes of gynecological cancer and the pattern of metastases [9-11]. The histological subtype is expected to be a predictor for the occurrence of PM [12]. Nevertheless, more knowledge about predictive factors on PM is necessary. This is especially the case since promising therapeutic modalities are upcoming. To the best of our knowledge, no population-based studies on the incidence of PM in gynecological cancers have been conducted. In addition, predictive patient- and tumor characteristics for the development of PM of gynecological origin are not yet studied on a large scale. Therefore, we describe the incidence of PM in gynecological cancers and identify predictors that increase the probability of peritoneal spread, so we can contribute to an increasing clinical guidance into a more targeted treatment strategy for patients with gynecological cancers. MATERIALS AND METHODS 1. Data collection We conducted a retrospective study. All consecutive patients with primary ovarian (C56, C57, C48), endometrial (C54, C55) and cervical (C53) cancer diagnosed between 1989 and 2015 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) [13]. Registration in the NCR takes place based on notification of newly diagnosed malignancies in the Netherlands by the automated nationwide pathology archive (Pathological Anatomical National Automated Archive [PALGA]). Specially trained administrators of the NCR routinely extract information on patients and tumor characteristics from the medical records. Completeness of the NCR is estimated to be over 95% [14]. The data contained patient characteristics, such as date of diagnosis and age at diagnosis. Socio-economic status was based on a patient's postal area according to the Netherlands Institute for Social Research [15]. A medical history of other malignant (non-) gynecological tumors was derived from the NCR. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage was derived from the tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) staging system and was based on postoperative findings for ovarian cancer and endometrial cancer. In cervical cancer patients, FIGO was https://ejgo.org https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2020.31.e58 2/12 Incidence and predictors of peritoneal metastases based on clinical staging, using all available medical information of the patients as accurately as possible including imaging techniques, scopies and biopsies. Moreover, if patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, stage was based on clinical findings again including imaging, scopies and biopsies in order to avoid downstaging in case of good response. Lymph node involvement and distant metastases were identified. In case patients did not undergo surgical treatment, FIGO stage, lymph node involvement and distant metastases were based on clinical information (such as imaging techniques). As such, this was not in all cases histologically confirmed. Type of histology was classified into groups based on the primary site of the tumor. 2. Statistical analyses Patients were distributed among period groups according to the year of diagnosis (1989–1994, 1995–2000, 2001–2005, 2005–2010, 2011–2015) and into age groups (18–49 years, 50–74 years, >75 years). Descriptive statistics were used to provide an overview of all patients with gynecological cancer. Early stage ovarian (FIGO stage I–IIa), endometrial (FIGO stage I–II) and cervical (FIGO stage I–II) cancer patients were excluded from further analyses, as by definition, they could not develop PM. Ovarian cancer patients with an unknown FIGO stage were included, as TNM was not registered within the NCR for primary peritoneal cancers until 2010. Endometrial and cervical cancer patients with an unknown FIGO stage were excluded. Crude and European standardized (European standardized rate) incidence rates of ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancer patients with PM were calculated. Since registration in the NCR expanded in 2005 for the localization of metastases, a subgroup analysis regarding age-adjusted incidence rates between