Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Role of tumour-free margin distance for loco-regional control in vulvar cancer-a subset analysis of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie CaRE-1 multicenter study.
Woelber, Linn; Griebel, Lis-Femke; Eulenburg, Christine; Sehouli, Jalid; Jueckstock, Julia; Hilpert, Felix; de Gregorio, Nikolaus; Hasenburg, Annette; Ignatov, Atanas; Hillemanns, Peter; Fuerst, Sophie; Strauss, Hans-Georg; Baumann, Klaus H; Thiel, Falk C; Mustea, Alexander; Meier, Werner; Harter, Philipp; Wimberger, Pauline; Hanker, Lars Christian; Schmalfeldt, Barbara; Canzler, Ulrich; Fehm, Tanja; Luyten, Alexander; Hellriegel, Martin; Kosse, Jens; Heiss, Christoph; Hantschmann, Peer; Mallmann, Peter; Tanner, Berno; Pfisterer, Jacobus; Richter, Barbara; Neuser, Petra; Mahner, Sven.
Afiliação
  • Woelber L; Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. Electronic address: lwoelber@uke.de.
  • Griebel LF; Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
  • Eulenburg C; Department of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department for Epidemiology, Medical Statistics and Decision Making, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
  • Sehouli J; Department of Gynecology, Charité, University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
  • Jueckstock J; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
  • Hilpert F; University Medical Center Kiel, Kiel, Germany; Jerusalem Hospital, Hamburg, Germany.
  • de Gregorio N; Department of Gynecology, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
  • Hasenburg A; Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, University Hospital Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
  • Ignatov A; Department of Gynecology, University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
  • Hillemanns P; Department of Gynecology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
  • Fuerst S; Department of Gynecology, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany.
  • Strauss HG; Department of Gynecology, University of Halle, Halle, Germany.
  • Baumann KH; Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany; Department of Gynecology, Klinikum Ludwigshafen, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
  • Thiel FC; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany; Department of Gynecology, Alb Fils Kliniken, Klinik am Eichert, Goeppingen, Germany.
  • Mustea A; Department of Gynecology, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
  • Meier W; Department of Gynecology, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
  • Harter P; Department of Gynecology, Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen, Germany.
  • Wimberger P; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
  • Hanker LC; Department of Gynecology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany; Department of Gynecology, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
  • Schmalfeldt B; Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Gynecology, University Hospital Technical University of Munich, Germany.
  • Canzler U; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
  • Fehm T; Department of Gynecology, Düsseldorf University Hospital, Düsseldorf, Germany; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
  • Luyten A; Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecologic Oncology, Wolfsburg Hospital, Wolfsburg, Germany.
  • Hellriegel M; Department of Gynecology, Georg-August-University Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany.
  • Kosse J; Department of Gynecology, Offenbach Hospital, Offenbach, Germany.
  • Heiss C; Department of Gynecology, Alb Fils Kliniken, Klinik am Eichert, Goeppingen, Germany.
  • Hantschmann P; Department of Gynecology, Hospital Altoettingen, Altoettignen, Germany.
  • Mallmann P; Department of Gynecology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
  • Tanner B; Oberhavel Hospital, Oranienburg, Germany.
  • Pfisterer J; Gynecologic Oncology Center, Kiel, Germany.
  • Richter B; Elbland Hospital Meißen-Radebeul, Radebeul Germany.
  • Neuser P; KKS Philipps University Marburg, Marburg; Germany.
  • Mahner S; Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Gynecology, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany.
Eur J Cancer ; 69: 180-188, 2016 12.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27837710
ABSTRACT
AIM OF THE STUDY A tumour-free pathological resection margin of ≥8 mm is considered state-of-the-art. Available evidence is based on heterogeneous cohorts. This study was designed to clarify the relevance of the resection margin for loco-regional control in vulvar cancer.

METHODS:

AGO-CaRE-1 is a large retrospective study. Patients (n = 1618) with vulvar cancer ≥ FIGO stage IB treated at 29 German gynecologic-cancer-centres 1998-2008 were included. This subgroup analysis focuses on solely surgically treated node-negative patients with complete tumour resection (n = 289).

RESULTS:

Of the 289 analysed patients, 141 (48.8%) had pT1b, 140 (48.4%) pT2 and 8 (2.8%) pT3 tumours. One hundred twenty-five (43.3%) underwent complete vulvectomy, 127 (43.9%) partial vulvectomy and 37 (12.8%) radical local excision. The median minimal resection margin was 5 mm (1 mm-33 mm); all patients received groin staging, in 86.5% with full dissection. Median follow-up was 35.1 months. 46 (15.9%) patients developed recurrence, thereof 34 (11.8%) at the vulva, after a median of 18.3 months. Vulvar recurrence rates were 12.6% in patients with a margin <8 mm and 10.2% in patients with a margin ≥8 mm. When analysed as a continuous variable, the margin distance had no statistically significant impact on local recurrence (HR per mm increase 0.930, 95% CI 0.849-1.020; p = 0.125). Multivariate analyses did also not reveal a significant association between the margin and local recurrence neither when analysed as continuous variable nor categorically based on the 8 mm cutoff. Results were consistent when looking at disease-free-survival and time-to-recurrence at any site (HR per mm increase 0.949, 95% CI 0.864-1.041; p = 0.267).

CONCLUSIONS:

The need for a minimal margin of 8 mm could not be confirmed in the large and homogeneous node-negative cohort of the AGO-CaRE database.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia / Neoplasias Vulvares / Carcinoma de Células Escamosas / Margens de Excisão / Recidiva Local de Neoplasia Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Middle aged País como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia / Neoplasias Vulvares / Carcinoma de Células Escamosas / Margens de Excisão / Recidiva Local de Neoplasia Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Middle aged País como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article