Treatment optimization of pelvic external beam radiation and/or vaginal brachytherapy for patients with stage I to II high-risk Endometrioid adenocarcinoma: a retrospective multi-institutional analysis

• Main Authors: Wenhui Wang, Lijuan Zou, Tiejun Wang, Zi Liu, Jianli He, Xiaoge Sun, Wei Zhong, Fengju Zhao, Xiaomei Li, Sha Li, Hong Zhu, Zhanshu Ma, Shuai Sun, Meng Jin, Fuquan Zhang, Xiaorong Hou, Lichun Wei, Ke Hu
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2021-07-01
• Series: BMC Cancer
• Subjects: Endometrioid adenocarcinoma; High-risk; Stage I to II; Pelvic external beam radiation (EBRT); Vaginal brachytherapy (VBT)
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-08524-x

Abstract Background For stage I to II high-risk endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients, the optimal adjuvant radiotherapy modality remains controversial. The present study sought to optimize the treatment of pelvic external beam radiation (EBRT) with/or vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) for high-risk endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients in multiple radiation oncology centers across China. Methods This article retrospectively reviewed stage I to II patients with resected endometrioid adenocarcinoma treated at 13 radiation centers from 1999 to 2015. Patients were eligible if they had high-risk features (stage IB Grade 3 disease or stage II Grade 1–3 disease) on the basis of ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO risk group consensus. Results A total of 218 patients were included. Fifty-one patients received EBRT, 25 patients received VBT, and 142 patients were administered EBRT combined with VBT. The three groups were comparable in baseline characteristics, except the proportion of stage IB and Grade 3 disease in the VBT group was significantly higher and their age was older. Survival analysis showed that OS, DFS, LRFS and DMFS were significantly different among the three groups. Two out of three groups were compared with each other, and results demonstrated that DFS, LRFS and DMFS were worse in the VBT group than in the EBRT or EBRT + VBT group. The 3-year OS rates were 95.2, 85.2 and 95.1% in the EBRT, VBT and EBRT + VBT groups, respectively (p = 0.043). There was no significant difference in survival outcomes between EBRT group and EBRT + VBT group. A propensity matching analysis was performed to eliminate group differences. The results demonstrated that DFS and LRFS were significantly improved in the pelvic radiation group compared to the VBT group. Distant failure accounted for most of the failure patterns. Patients in the VBT group had significantly increased local and regional recurrence rates than patients in the EBRT or EBRT + VBT group. Acute and chronic radiation-induced toxicities were well tolerated for all patients. Conclusion For patients with postoperative stage I to II high-risk endometrioid adenocarcinoma, compared with VBT alone, radiotherapy modalities including EBRT significantly improved DFS, LRFS and DMFS with tolerable adverse effects. Overall survival was not significantly different between EBRT and EBRT + VBT modalities.