Efficacy analysis of different adjuvant treatments for cervical cancer patients with postoperative intermediate-risk factors
10.3760/cma.j.cn115355-20220114-00024
- VernacularTitle:不同辅助治疗方式对术后存在中危因素子宫颈癌患者的疗效分析
- Author:
Kaidong LIU
1
;
Yanping SUN
Author Information
1. 山西省肿瘤医院 中国医学科学院肿瘤医院山西医院 山西医科大学附属肿瘤医院放腹盆二病区，太原 030013
- Keywords:
Uterine cervical neoplasms;
Concurrent chemoradiotherapy;
Intermediate-risk factors;
Radiotherapy
- From:
Cancer Research and Clinic
2023;35(7):532-536
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the efficacy and adverse reactions of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and radiotherapy (RT) alone in the treatment of cervical cancer patients with intermediate-risk factors after operation.Methods:The clinical data of 210 patients with cervical cancer patients after operation in Shanxi Province Cancer Hospital between August 2014 to March 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The postoperative pathology met the Sedlis standard. All patients were divided into RT alone group (100 cases) and CRT group (110 cases) according to the different adjuvant treatment regimens; and the efficacy and adverse reactions of both groups were also analyzed.Results:The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 82.8%, 81.5%, respectively in RT alone group and CRT group ; 5-year PFS rate was 80.6%, 77.4%, respectively in RT alone group and CRT group; and there were no statistically significant differences in the PFS of both groups ( χ2 = 0.29, P = 0.591). The 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was 88.5%, 86.7%, respectively in RT alone group and CRT group; 5-year OS rate was 86.4%,82.6%, respectively in RT alone group and CRT group; and there were no statistically significant differences in the OS of both groups ( χ2 = 0.59, P = 0.443). The local recurrence rate was 8.0% (8/100) and 9.1% (10/110), respectively in RT alone group and CRT group, and the difference was statistically significant ( χ2 = 0.08, P = 0.778); the distant metastasis rate was 11.0% (11/100) and 12.7% (14/110), respectively in RT alone group and CRT group, and the difference was statistically significant ( χ2 = 0.15, P = 0.699); the incidence of bone marrow suppression was 42.0% (42 /100) and 61.8% (68/110), respectively in RT alone group and CRT group, and the difference was statistically significant ( χ2 = 8.25, P < 0.01). The incidence of gastrointestinal reactions was 23.0% (23/100) and 77.3% (85/110), respectively in RT alone group and CRT group, and the difference was statistically significant ( χ2 = 49.94, P < 0.01);the incidence of radiation cystitis was 3.0% (3/100) and 3.6% (4/110), respectively in RT alone group and CRT group, and the difference was statistically significant ( χ2 = 0.06, P = 0.798). The incidence of radiation proctitis was 5.0 %(5/100) and 4.5% (5/110), respectively in RT alone group and CRT group, and the difference was statistically significant ( χ2 = 0.02, P = 0.877). Conclusions:For cervical cancer patients with intermediate-risk factors, CRT shows no survival benefit and increases the incidence of adverse reactions compared with RT alone.
