TitleFIGO2009分期标准在Ⅰ期子宫内膜样腺癌患者预后评估中的意义
Other TitlesSignificance of prognostic evaluation of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 staging system on stage Ⅰ endometrioid adenocarcinoma
Authors王志启
张燕
王建六
沈丹华
牟田
赵昕
姚远洋
白云
魏丽惠
Affiliation100044,北京大学人民医院妇科
河北省邯郸市第四医院妇产科
100044,北京大学人民医院病理科
北京积水潭医院妇产科
Keywords子宫内膜肿瘤 癌,子宫内膜样 肿瘤分期 预后 Endometrial neoplasms Carcinoma,endometrioid Neoplasm staging Prognosis
Issue Date2012
Publisher中华妇产科杂志
Citation中华妇产科杂志.2012,47,(1),33-39.
Abstract目的 探讨2009年国际妇产科联盟(FIGO 2009)分期标准在Ⅰ期子宫内膜样腺癌患者预后评估中的意义.方法 选取1995年1月至2008年2月间北京大学人民医院收治的244例FIGO 2009 Ⅰ期的子宫内膜样腺癌患者,分析FIGO 2009分期标准在Ⅰ期子宫内膜样腺癌患者预后评估中的意义.结果(1)按照FIGO 2009 Ⅰ期的分期标准,1988年的FIGO(FIGO 1988)分期Ⅰ期的患者中多数患者亚分期降低,部分FIGO 1988Ⅱa期和Ⅲa期单纯腹腔细胞学阳性患者分期降为FIGO 2009 Ⅰ期.244例子宫内膜样腺癌患者中,200例FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期患者中包含FIGO 1988 Ⅰ a期34例、Ⅰb期150例、Ⅱa期10例和Ⅲa期单纯腹腔细胞学阳性患者6例;44例FIGO 2009 Ⅰ b期患者中包含FIGO 1988 Ⅰ b期6例、Ⅰc期29例、Ⅱa期6例和Ⅲa期单纯腹腔细胞学阳性患者3例.(2)FIGO 1988 Ⅰ a期患者中低病理分级比例明显高于FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期(p=0.003),FIGO1988 Ⅰ a、Ⅰb期患者与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期患者的年龄、子宫切除范围、腹膜后淋巴结切除比例、接受放疗和化疗比例比较均无显著差异(P>0.05).FIGO 1988 Ⅰ a、Ⅰb期患者的复发率[分别为5.9%(2/34)和6.7%(10/150)]和病死率[分别为2.9%(1/34)和2.7%(4/150)],分别与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期患者[分别为6.5%(13/200)、3.0%(6/200)]比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).FIGO 1988 Ⅰ a期和Ⅰb期及FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期患者的5年无瘤生存率分别为(97.0±3.0)%、(95.3±2.1)%、(96.1±1.6)%,10年无瘤生存率分别为(90.9±6.5)%、(90.2±3.6)%、(89.6±3.2)%;FIGO 1988 Ⅰ a期和Ⅰb期及FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期患者的5年总生存率分别为100%、(96.9±1.8)%、(97.9±1.2)%,10年总生存率分别为(93.8±6.0)%、(95.2±2.5)%、(93.4±2.8)%,FIGO 1988 Ⅰ a期和Ⅰb期上述各种指标分别与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).(3)FIGO 1988 Ⅰ c期与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ b期患者的年龄、病理分级、子宫切除范围、腹膜后淋巴结切除比例、接受放疗和化疗比例比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).FIGO 1988 Ⅰ c期与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ b期患者的复发率[分别为3.4%(1/29)和6.8%(3/44)]和病死率[分别为0例和2.3%(1/44)]比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).FIGO 1988 Ⅰ c期患者的5年和10年无瘤生存率均为100%,FIGO 2009 Ⅰ b期患者分别为100%和(90.9±6.2)%;FIGO 1988 Ⅰ c期患者的5年和10年总生存率均为100%,FIGO 2009Ⅰb期患者分别为100%和(95.0±4.9)%,FIGO1988 Ⅰ c期上述指标分别与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ b期比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).(4)与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ b期患者相比,FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期患者平均年龄小(P<0.01)、病理分级低(P=0.029)、接受放疗和化疗比例低(P<0.01);而两者的子宫切除范围和腹膜后淋巴结切除比例比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ b期患者的复发率和病死率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期患者的5年和10年无瘤生存率及5年和10年总无瘤生存率分别与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ b期比较,差异也均无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 FIGO 1988 Ⅰ a期及Ⅰb期患者的预后与FIGO 2009 Ⅰ a期患者比较均无明显差异;FIGO 2009 Ⅰa期与Ⅰb期患者的预后也无明显差异,可能与Ⅰb期患者术后多接受化疗和放疗有关.
To explore the impact of 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system alteration for stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma on its' prognosis assessing.A retrospective study was carried out on 244 cases with endometrial carcinoma admitted in Peking University People's Hospital from Jan.1995 to Feb.2008.(1) All 244 patients were divided into FIGO 2009 Ia group (n = 200) and FIGO 2009 Ib group (n = 44) according to FIGO 2009 staging system, while they were divided into FIGO 1988 Ia group (n = 34), FIGO 1988 Ib group (n = 156) and FIGO 1988 Ic group (n = 29). The others 25 cases were stage IIa (n = 16) and stage IIIa with merely positive abdominal cytology (n = 9) according to FIGO 1988 staging system.(2) The higher percentage of low-grade in FIGO 1988 Ia group than that in FIGO 2009 Ia group (P = 0.003). Compared with FIGO 2009 Ia group, the age of the patients, surgery extent, the percentage of lymph node excision and received chemotherapy and radiotherapy, there were no difference in FIGO 1988 Ia and Ib group, respectively (P > 0.05). There were 5.9% (2/34) and 6.7% (10/150) found relapse among FIGO 1988 Ia group and FIGO 1988 Ib group, and there were 2.9% (1/34) and 2.7% (4/150) for the two groups died of carcinoma. Compared with FIGO 2009 Ia group, there were not significant difference [7.5% (13/200) vs. 3.0% (6/200); P > 0.05]. The 5 years and 10 years progression-free survival (PFS) of FIGO 1988 Ia group and Ib group were (97.0 ± 3.0)%, (90.9 ± 6.5)% and (95.3 ± 2.1)%, (90.2 ± 3.6)%, respectively, in which there were not significant difference compared with that in FIGO 2009 Ia group [(96.1 ± 1.6)%, (89.6 ± 3.2)%; P > 0.05]. The 5 years and 10 years overall survival (OS) in FIGO 1988 Ia group and Ib group were 100%, (93.8 ± 6.0)% and (96.9 ± 1.8)%, (95.2 ± 2.5)%, respectively, in which there were did not significant difference with that in FIGO 2009 Ia group [(97.9 ± 1.2)%, (93.4 ± 2.8)%; P > 0.05].(3) There were not significant difference between FIGO 1988 Ic group and FIGO 2009 Ib group (P > 0.05) for the age of the patients, grade, surgery extent, lymph node excision, the percentage of received chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Between FIGO 1988 Ic group and FIGO 2009 Ib group, there were 3.4% (1/29) and 6.8% (3/44) cases found relapse, respectively. And there were 0 and 2.3% (1/44) cases died of carcinoma in the two groups, in which there were not differ much either (P > 0.05). The 5 years and 10 years PFS in FIGO 1988 Ic group were all 100%, while they were 100% and (90.9 ± 6.2)% in FIGO 2009 Ib group. The 5 years and 10 years OS in FIGO 1988 Ic group were all 100%, but were 100% and (95.0 ± 4.9)% in FIGO 2009 Ib group, in which they all did not significantly differ much (P > 0.05). (4) The patients in FIGO 2009 Ia group were younger than those in FIGO 2009 Ib group (P < 0.01). The percentage of low grade in FIGO 2009 Ia group were higher than that in FIGO 2009 Ib group (P = 0.029). The percentages of received chemotherapy and radiotherapy in FIGO 2009 Ia group were lower than that in FIGO 2009 Ib group remarkably (P < 0.01). But there were not significant difference in the uterine excision extent and the percentage of lymph node excision between the two groups (P > 0.05). There were not significantly differ in the relapse rates and the death rates between the FIGO 2009 Ia group and FIGO 2009 Ib group (P > 0.05). There were also not significant difference in PFS and OS between the two groups (P > 0.05).There were not significant difference in the prognosis between FIGO 2009 stage Ia and FIGO 1988 stage Ia and Ib. There were also not significant difference in the prognosis between FIGO 2009 stage Ia and FIGO 2009 stage Ib, which may be due to received more chemotherapy and radiotherapy in FIGO 2009 stage Ib patients.
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11897/192410
ISSN0529-567X
DOI10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2012.01.009
IndexedPubMed
中文核心期刊要目总览(PKU)
中国科技核心期刊(ISTIC)
中国科学引文数据库(CSCD)
Appears in Collections:人民医院

Web of Science®



Checked on Last Week

Scopus®



Checked on Current Time

百度学术™



Checked on Current Time

Google Scholar™





License: See PKU IR operational policies.