EClinicalMedicine (Jul 2024)
Oncologic outcomes after Total Mesometrial Resection (TMMR) or treatment according to current international guidelines in FIGO (2009) stages IB1-IIB cervical cancer: an observational cohort studyResearch in context
Abstract
Summary: Background: According to international guidelines, standard treatment (ST) with curative intent in cervical cancer (CC) comprises radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in early stages (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 IB1, IIA1), adjuvant chemoradiation is recommended based on risk factors upon final pathology. Definitive chemoradiation is recommended in locally advanced stages (FIGO 2009 IB2, IIA2, IIB). Total mesometrial resection (TMMR) with therapeutic lymph node dissection (tLND) without adjuvant radiation has emerged as a promising treatment. Here we compare oncologic outcome by TMMR + tLND or ST. Methods: In this observational cohort study, women treated according to international guidelines were identified in the population-based registries from Sweden and women treated with TMMR were identified in the Leipzig Mesometrial Resection (MMR) Study Database (DRKS 0001517) 2011–2020. Relevant clinical and tumour related variables were extracted. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) by ST or TMMR was analysed with log-rank test, cumulative incidence function and proportional hazard regression yielding hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for relevant confounders. Findings: Between 2011 and 2020, 1007 women were included in the final analysis. 733 women were treated according to ST and 274 with TMMR. RFS at five years was 77.9% (95% CI 74.3–81.1) and 82.6% (95% CI 77.2–86.9) for the ST and TMMR cohorts respectively (p = 0.053). In early-stage CC, RFS was higher after TMMR as compared to ST, 91.2% vs 81.8% (p = 0.002). In the adjusted analysis, TMMR was associated with a lower hazard of recurrence (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.22–0.69) and death (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.21–0.86) compared to ST. The absolute difference in risk of recurrence at 5 years was 9.4% (95% CI 3.2–15.7) in favor of TMMR. In locally advanced CC, no significant differences in RFS or OS was observed. Interpretation: Compared to ST, TMMR without radiation therapy was associated with superior oncologic outcomes in women with early-stage cervical cancer whereas no difference was observed in locally advanced disease. Our findings together with previous evidence suggest that TMMR may be considered the primary option for both early-stage and locally advanced cervical cancer confined to the Müllerian compartment. Funding: This study was supported by grants from Centre for Clinical Research Sörmland (Sweden) and Region Stockholm (Sweden).
