Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 26(9): 1594-1600, 2016 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27654263

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients with the presence of abdominal wall metastasis (AWM) are categorized as stage International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) IVB, irrespective of other biologic factors or preceding invasive intervention before final surgery. We evaluated the impact of AWM on patients' overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this exploratory study, 634 consecutive patients with advanced EOC treated in our center from 2000 to 2014 were included. Patients were categorized into FIGO IIIC (n = 308), FIGO IVB AWM only (n = 86), and FIGO IV others (metastases other than AWM, n = 240). Clinicopathological parameters and survival data were extracted from our prospectively maintained tumor registry. Survival analyses were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression models. RESULTS: In 75 (87.2%) of 86 cases, AWM was seen after a preceding intervention, and only in 12.7%, the deposits were spontaneously established. The median OS in patients with stage FIGO IIIC, FIGO IVB AWM only, and FIGO IV others was 37, 58, and 25 months (P < 0.001), respectively. Patients with FIGO IVB AWM only had a significantly better OS than patients with FIGO IV others (P < 0.001). The numeric longer OS of patients with FIGO IVB AWM only compared with patients with FIGO IIIC was not statistically significant (P = 0.151). In multivariate analysis considering all confounding factors including residual disease, OS of patients with FIGO IIIC did not differ from patients with FIGO AWM only (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-12.26; P = 0.398). CONCLUSIONS: Most AWM are acquired after preceding intervention (puncture or laparoscopy). Prognosis of patients with AWM as the only site of distant metastasis is superior compared with other stage FIGO IV patients. Therefore, up-staging of patients only because of AWM to FIGO IVB may be questioned. A revision/clarification of the FIGO classification system should be considered to avoid unnecessary stigmatization of patients and to classify these patients more appropriately according to prognosis.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Epiteliais e Glandulares/mortalidade , Neoplasias Ovarianas/mortalidade , Neoplasias Peritoneais/mortalidade , Parede Abdominal/patologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Carcinoma Epitelial do Ovário , Feminino , Alemanha/epidemiologia , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Neoplasias Epiteliais e Glandulares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Epiteliais e Glandulares/patologia , Neoplasias Ovarianas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Ovarianas/patologia , Neoplasias Peritoneais/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Peritoneais/secundário , Prognóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa