Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology Advance Access originally published online on January 17, 2008
Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 2008 38(1):26-30; doi:10.1093/jjco/hym136
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved
Patterns of Pretreatment Diagnostic Assessment and Staging for Patients with Cervical Cancer (1999–2001): Patterns of Care Study in Japan*
1 Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medical Science, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa
2 Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center, Nagoya
3 Department of Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba
4 Department of Radiology, Shinshu University School of Medicine, Matsumoto
5 Department of Medical Physics and Engineering, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka, Japan
6 Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
For reprints and all correspondence: Takafumi Toita, Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medical Science, University of the Ryukyus, 207 Uehara, Nishihara, Okinawa 903-0215, Japan. E-mail: b983255{at}med.u-ryukyu.ac.jp
Received June 26, 2007; accepted September 19, 2007
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 TOP Abstract INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONFundingReferences |
|---|
Objective: To evaluate the patterns of pretreatment diagnostic assessment in uterine cervical cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy in Japan.
Methods: The Japanese Patterns of Care Study working group conducted a second extramural audit survey of 68 institutions and collected specific information on 631 patients with cervical cancer. All patients were treated with radiotherapy in 1999–2001. Of these, 324 patients treated without surgery were the subjects of this study.
Results: International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics-prescribed diagnostic procedures were performed at moderate rates in our study cohort. The performance rates of chest X-ray, intravenous urography, cystoscopy, and proctoscopy were 74, 54, 53, and 33%, respectively. Cross sectional imaging studies were frequently performed. Pelvic CT, abdominal CT, and pelvic MRI were performed in 88, 80, and 76%, respectively. Lymphangiography (1%) and surgical evaluation (1%) were rarely done. Only one patient underwent PET scans in this survey period.
Conclusions: This study demonstrated the patterns of pretreatment diagnostic assessment in cervical cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy in Japan.
Key Words: cervix neoplasm • radiotherapy • patterns of care • FIGO
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONFundingReferences |
|---|
The pretreatment assessment of cancer extension is extremely important for prognosis estimation and treatment planning. Additionally, a well-defined initial assessment enables the comparison of cancer treatment results among institutions or different treatment methods. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) provides a global staging system for gynecologic cancers (1). Most clinicians use this staging system in the treatment of uterine cervical cancer. The system describes the rules for stage classification in detail, and the permitted diagnostic procedures are clearly stated. However, some of the procedures included, such as intravenous urography, and skeletal X-rays, could be considered outdated. Although tumor diameter and pelvic nodal status are not accounted for in the FIGO staging system, they are estimated to be the important prognostic factors for cervical cancer (2). In several studies, tumor diameter as assessed by MRI was a significant prognostic indicator for patients with cervical cancer (3–5). Evaluation of pelvic or para-aortic lymph node status with optional imaging studies, such as CT, MRI, and lymphangiograpy, may also be useful for predicting prognosis (6).
Several studies describe the patterns of pretreatment work-up of cervical cancer in the USA (7–9); however, there are few studies from Japan. The objective of this study was to review the patterns of pretreatment diagnostic assessment of cervical cancer in Japan.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONFundingReferences |
|---|
Between July 2002 and June 2004, the Japanese Patterns of Care Study group (JPCS) conducted a national survey of patients with cervical cancer treated with radiotherapy. Sixty-eight out of 640 institutions were selected for the survey with a stratified 2-staged cluster sampling method (10). Prior to random sampling, all institutions were classified into one of four groups. The criteria for stratification have been detailed elsewhere (10). In brief, the JPCS stratified Japanese institutions as follows: A1, academic institutions treating
430 patients annually; A2, <430 patients; B1, non-academic institutions treating 130 patients annually; B2, <130 patients. Academic institutions included cancer center hospitals and university hospitals. Non-academic institutions consisted of other facilities, such as national, prefectural, municipal, and private hospitals. The JPCS surveyors performed on-site chart reviews at each participating facility using an originally developed format for cervical cancer. Data collection included patient characteristics (e.g. patient history, age, performance status, laboratory data, pathology, and stage), details of pre-treatment work-up, therapeutic information (e.g. radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and surgery), and treatment outcome. Patient eligibility criteria of the survey were as follows: (i) carcinoma, (ii) treatment between January 1999 and December 2001, (iii) no distant metastases, (iv) no prior or concurrent malignancy, (v) no gross para-aortic lymph node metastases, and (vi) no previous pelvic radiotherapy. The JPCS collected clinical data on 631 patients with uterine cervical cancer who were treated with radiotherapy from 68 institutions. In this study, 324 patients treated by radiotherapy without planned surgery (definitive radiotherapy) were analysed. These included 115 patients from A1 institutions, 70 patients from A2 institutions, 104 patients from B1 institutions, and 35 patients from B2 institutions.
Statistical significance was tested using the chi-square test. Cases with ‘unknown’ and ‘missing’ values were combined in the tables because their meanings were the same in most cases: no valid data were found in the given resources (11).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONFundingReferences |
|---|
Table 1 describes the patient characteristics in the JPCS 1999–2001 survey of cervical cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy. Table 2 shows the performance rates of the diagnostic procedures. Of the diagnostic procedures prescribed by FIGO, three quarters of the patients underwent a chest X-ray. Other examinations, such as intravenous urography, cystoscopy, and proctoscopy, were performed in approximately 30–50% of the patients. Table 3 shows the performance of the examinations according to stage. A substantial number of early stage (I, II) patients underwent these diagnostic tests prescribed by the FIGO system. Majority of the patients underwent both pelvic and abdominal CT. Pelvic MRI was also frequently performed. CT and MRI were performed mostly irrespective of stage. Lymphangiography (LAG) and surgical staging were rarely performed. Only one patient underwent PET examination in the survey period.
|
|
|
Tumor diameter was recorded in 75% (242/324). The tumor diameter evaluation rates by FIGO stage were 67% (29/43) for stage I, 83% (85/102) for stage II, 77% (94/122) for stage III, and 80% (28/35) for stage IVA (P = 0.01). MRI was the most common modality for evaluating tumor size (47%) followed by CT (16%). Only a small percentage of patients had a tumor size evaluation consisting of only a pelvic examination (6%). Tumor size increased significantly with increasing stage. Median tumor size was 26 mm (range: 0–45 mm) for stage I, 40 mm (range: 15–90 mm) for stage II, 46 mm (range: 15–100 mm) for stage III, and 55 mm (range: 30–100 mm) for stage IVA (P < 0.0001). Pelvic nodal status was recorded in 82% (266/324) of the patients surveyed. The pelvic nodal assessment rate by stage was 88% (38/43) for stage I, 86% (88/102) for stage II, 83% (101/122) for stage III, and 94% (33/35) for stage IVA (P = 0.12). CT was most frequently used for the assessment of nodal status (72%). PET and surgical examination were never utilized for this purpose. Positive nodal status significantly correlated with FIGO stage: 2% for stage I, 6% for stage II, 16% for stage III, and 49% for stage IVA (P = 0.0001).
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONFundingReferences |
|---|
This study demonstrated the patterns of pretreatment diagnostic assessment for cervical cancer patients who underwent definitive radiation therapy between 1999 and 2001 in Japan. Several of the cases reviewed in this survey had unknown or missing data; and this was a theoretical weaknesses of our audit. Inclusion of cases with incomplete information in the ratio calculations, however, reduced the potential for overestimation of performance rates of the tests.
FIGO permitted procedures were performed more frequently than expected in the patients surveyed. The use of FIGO permitted examinations (e.g. intravenous urography, cystoscopy, and proctoscopy) is gradually decreasing in the USA (7–9). In a 2000–02 US study on the pretreatment evaluation of patients with stage IIB or less disease, the rates for performing intravenous urography, cystoscopy, and proctoscopy were 1, 16, and 17%, respectively (9). In contrast, the present study demonstrated that these exams were performed frequently even for early stage cases in Japan. Schmitz et al. (12) proposed that since the likelihood of upstaging using these examinations was very low in clinical stage IB patients, these exams could be omitted in those with stage IB disease. Now, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline states that cystoscopy and proctoscopy are optional exams for the pretreatment assessment of cervical cancer patients with a disease stage of IB2 or higher (http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/cervical.pdf).
This study demonstrated that CT and MRI were routinely utilized during the surveyed period in Japan. Tumor size and pelvic nodal status are considered to be extremely important prognostic factors for cervical cancer (2). Several studies showed the accuracy of MRI for measuring tumor diameter for uterine cervical cancer (13,14). In the 1990s, several researchers reported that tumor diameter, as assessed by MRI, significantly affected the outcome of cervical cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy (3–5). The radiological evaluation of lymph node metastases is also valuable in cervical cancer patients, with both CT and MRI having high predictive values (6). MR imaging had an accuracy of 93%, with 62.2% sensitivity and 97.9% specificity when a minimum axial diameter of 1.0 cm was adopted as a size criterion for detection of pelvic nodal metastases (15). The results of our study reflect the penetration of these findings into the clinical practice in Japan. Unfortunately, we were unable to precisely measure the performance rates of the assessments of tumor diameter and lymph node status due to a flaw in the survey format. Namely, we were unable to distinguish whether the assessments were performed by the treating physicians or were performed anew by the visiting surveyors at the time of the analysis. Despite this limitation, we were able to roughly approximate the tumor diameter and the lymph node status in each stage. In the next JPCS presently being conducted, the format has been revised to clarify the aforementioned points. Our data will aid in comparing outcome between Japan and other countries. Abdominal CT has diagnostic value in detecting extrapelvic metastases (i.e. liver and para-aortic node) and the presence of hydronephrosis or a non-functioning kidney. Despite the potential usefulness of CT and MRI, these cross-sectional imaging studies are listed as optional examinations in the FIGO system (1). FIGO also acknowledges the usefulness of these exams. However, FIGO does not accept them for staging purposes, primarily because these instruments are not generally available in developing countries. The FIGO system clearly states that findings from these exams should not be the basis for staging (1). Improper application of these exams could lead to staging migration (2). However, we believe that these cross-sectional imaging studies should be applied universally not to determine FIGO stage but to assess important prognostic factors, namely tumor diameter and nodal status.
Several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) performed in the USA demonstrated the therapeutic value of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/cervicalcancer ). Most of these trials required extensive evaluation of para-aortic lymph nodes by surgical exploration or LAG. This limits the translatability of the recommendations from these trials to the Japanese clinical practice. LAG and surgical staging were rarely performed for patients in our survey. Although Eifel reported that lymph nodal status was assessed by LAG in 13.6%, and surgical evaluation in 12.2% in the US PCS (1996–99), other studies revealed that, the performance of LAG has been decreasing recently (7–9). A similar problem exists in the evaluation of tumor diameter. In the US RCTs, tumor diameter was determined by physical examination. However, tumor size assessment by physical examination is highly subjective. Thus an objective method such as CT or MRI is preferable particularly when patients are being stratified in a clinical trial. This would facilitate the translation of evidence to clinical practice.
PET was rarely performed during the study period in Japan despite being shown to be useful in the late 1990s (16). Its application is expected to increase in the future, because the Japanese health insurance plan has covered it since 2004.
In summary, the JPCS describes the general patterns of pretreatment diagnostic assessment in cervical cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy during 1999–2001 in Japan. Patterns of pretreatment work-up should be continuously monitored in order to avoid staging migration, to properly treat individual patients, and to fairly compare treatment methods.
|
Funding |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONFundingReferences |
|---|
This study was supported by the following grants: Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (Grant-in-Aid for Cancer Research nos. 14-6 and 18-4 Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research: Third Term Comprehensive Control Research for Cancer (H16-039).
|
Acknowledgment |
|---|
The authors thank all radiation oncologists who participated in this study. Their cooperation in providing information made the surveys possible.
Conflict of interest statement
None declared.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
* Presented, in part, at the 91st Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA).
|
References |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONFundingReferences |
|---|
1 Quinn MA, Benedet JL, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, Beller U, Creasman WT, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix uteri. FIGO 6th Annual Report on the Results of Treatment in Gynecological Cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet (2006) 95(Suppl 1):S43–103.[CrossRef][Medline]
2 Eifel PJ. The Uterine cervix. Cox JD, Ang KK, eds. (2003) Mosby: St. Louis. 681–723. Radiation Oncology: Rationale, Technique, Results.
3 Hricak H, Quivey JM, Campos Z, Gildengorin V, Hindmarsh T, Bis KG, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: predictive value of clinical and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging assessment of prognostic factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys (1993) 27:791–801.[ISI][Medline]
4 Mayr NA, Yuh WT, Zheng J, Ehrhardt JC, Sorosky JI, Magnotta VA, et al. Tumor size evaluated by pelvic examination compared with 3-D quantitative analysis in the prediction of outcome for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys (1997) 39:395–404.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
5 Toita T, Kakinohana Y, Shinzato S, Ogawa K, Yoshinaga M, Iraha S, et al. Tumor diameter/volume and pelvic node status assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for uterine cervical cancer treated with irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys (1999) 43:777–82.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
6 Scheidler J, Hricak H, Yu KK, Subak L, Segal MR. Radiological evaluation of lymph node metastases in patients with cervical cancer. A meta-analysis. JAMA (1997) 278:1096–101.[Abstract]
7 Montana GS, Hanlon AL, Brickner TJ, Owen JB, Hanks GE, Ling CC, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: patterns of care studies: review of 1978, 1983, and 1988–1989 surveys. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys (1995) 32:1481–6.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
8 Russell AH, Shingleton HM, Jones WB, Fremgen A, Winchester DP, Clive R, et al. Diagnostic assessments in patients with invasive cancer of the cervix: a national patterns of care study of the American College of Surgeons. Gynecol Oncol (1996) 63:159–65.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
9 Amendola MA, Hricak H, Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Chi DS, Long HJ III, et al. Utilization of diagnostic studies in the pretreatment evaluation of invasive cervical cancer in the United States: results of intergroup protocol ACRIN 6651/GOG 183. J Clin Oncol (2005) 23:7454–9.
10 Teshima T. Japanese PCS Working Group. Patterns of care study in Japan. Jpn J Clin Oncol (2005) 35:497–506.
11 Mitsumori M, Hiraoka M, Negoro Y, Yamauchi C, Shikama N, Sasaki S, et al. The patterns of care study for breast-conserving therapy in Japan: analysis of process survey from 1995 to 1997. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys (2005) 62:1048–54.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
12 Schmitz MJ, Nahhas WA, Clark MA, Brown M. Stage IB carcinoma of the cervix: are all staging tests and procedures necessary? Eur J Gynaecol Oncol (1994) 15:199–204.[Medline]
13 Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB, Azizi L, Stern JL. Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol (1995) 86:43–50.[Abstract]
14 Hawnaur JM, Johnson RJ, Buckley CH, Tindall V, Isherwood I. Staging, volume estimation and assessment of nodal status in carcinoma of the cervix: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging with surgical findings. Clin Radiol (1994) 49:443–52.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
15 Kim SH, Kim SC, Choi BI, Han MC. Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology (1994) 190:807–11.
16 Rose PG, Adler LP, Rodriguez M, Faulhaber PF, Abdul-Karim FW, Miraldi F. Positron emission tomography for evaluating para-aortic nodal metastasis in locally advanced cervical cancer before surgical staging: a surgicopathologic study. J Clin Oncol (1999) 17:41–5.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||