[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To explore and compare the differences in the clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of synchronous primary endometrial and ovarian cancers with primary endometrial cancer metastatic to adnexa.
Between January 1997 and December 2009, 51 cases with endometrial cancer simultaneously with adnexa malignancy were identified. Among them, there were 18 cases with synchronous primary cancers of the endometrium and ovary (Group A) and 33 cases with primary endometrial cancer metastatic to the adnexa (Group B). Clinical and pathologic information was obtained from medical records. Parametric methods were used to compare clinical and pathologic features. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed and compared using log-rank test.
The mean age at diagnosis of the disease was 56.6 ± 10.8 years (range 34-76 years) in Group A and 53.1 ± 9.5 years (range 37-76 years) in Group B. The two groups' distribution of preoperative image findings, size of endometrial lesion, myometrial invasion, unilateral or bilateral, cervix invasion, and postoperative radiation existed significant differences. With a mean follow-up time of 4.3 ± 3.4 years (range 2-11 years), 5-year overall survival (OS) was 75 and 56% in Groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.034). The univariate analysis showed only postoperative radiation and synchronous tumors were independent factors which affected OS (p = 0.015; p = 0.034) and progression-free survival (PFS) (p = 0.015; p = 0.036), respectively. Not any feature was revealed by multivariate analysis as independent prognostic factors.
Our results showed that OS and PFS of synchronous primary ovarian cancer in patients with endometrial cancer is better than those with ovarian metastasis patients. Pre- and intra-operative, intensive and careful assessment, and strict and continuous postoperative surveillance should pay attention to the endometrial cancer patients who preserved ovary for having possibility of coexisting occult ovarian lesions.
Archives of Gynecology 05/2011; 283(5):1133-7. · 0.91 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.