Survival After Fertility-Sparing Surgery for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Compared With Nonsparing Surgery: A Nationwide Comparative Study.

IF 4.6 3区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Janneke T Wolswinkel, Petra L M Zusterzeel, Anke Smits, Albert G Siebers, Hans H B Wenzel, Ruud L M Bekkers, Jogchum J Beltman, Christianne A R Lok, Constantijne H Mom, Nienke E van Trommel, Ronald P Zweemer, Jake S F Maurits, Mieke L G Ten Eikelder
{"title":"Survival After Fertility-Sparing Surgery for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Compared With Nonsparing Surgery: A Nationwide Comparative Study.","authors":"Janneke T Wolswinkel, Petra L M Zusterzeel, Anke Smits, Albert G Siebers, Hans H B Wenzel, Ruud L M Bekkers, Jogchum J Beltman, Christianne A R Lok, Constantijne H Mom, Nienke E van Trommel, Ronald P Zweemer, Jake S F Maurits, Mieke L G Ten Eikelder","doi":"10.1200/OP-25-00131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The oncologic safety of fertility-sparing surgery in young women with early-stage cervical cancer is largely based on retrospective data from small series, highlighting the need for larger studies to validate its safety.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a nation-wide retrospective matched cohort study of all patients age 18-45 years with Fédération Internationale de Gynécologie et d'Obstétrique (FIGO) 2018 stage IA1 to IB2 cervical cancer who underwent fertility-sparing surgery (FSS; cone biopsy, large loop excision of the transformation zone, or [radical] trachelectomy) between 2000 and 2022 in the Netherlands (fertility-sparing group). These patients were matched 1:2 with women who had a (radical) hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer (hysterectomy group). Patients were matched for pretreatment FIGO 2018 stage, histology, and lymph vascular space invasion. We compared data on recurrence-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival (OS) between the fertility-sparing group and the hysterectomy-group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 1,446 patients were included: 482 treated with FSS and 964 with a (radical) hysterectomy; 57.5% had stage 1A1 or 1A2, and 42.5% had IB1 or IB2 cervical cancer. The median follow-up was 8.9 years (IQR, 4.4-13.7). During the study period, 4.8% of patients developed a recurrence: 7.1% in the fertility-sparing group and 3.6% in the hysterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR], 2.21 [95% CI, 1.38 to 3.56]).The OS in both groups did not differ (HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.80]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Women treated with FSS had a significantly higher recurrence rate than patients who had the uterus completely removed. However, since the increased recurrence rate did not affect OS, fertility-sparing surgery appears to be a potentially safe treatment option.</p>","PeriodicalId":14612,"journal":{"name":"JCO oncology practice","volume":" ","pages":"OP2500131"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP-25-00131","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The oncologic safety of fertility-sparing surgery in young women with early-stage cervical cancer is largely based on retrospective data from small series, highlighting the need for larger studies to validate its safety.

Methods: We performed a nation-wide retrospective matched cohort study of all patients age 18-45 years with Fédération Internationale de Gynécologie et d'Obstétrique (FIGO) 2018 stage IA1 to IB2 cervical cancer who underwent fertility-sparing surgery (FSS; cone biopsy, large loop excision of the transformation zone, or [radical] trachelectomy) between 2000 and 2022 in the Netherlands (fertility-sparing group). These patients were matched 1:2 with women who had a (radical) hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer (hysterectomy group). Patients were matched for pretreatment FIGO 2018 stage, histology, and lymph vascular space invasion. We compared data on recurrence-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival (OS) between the fertility-sparing group and the hysterectomy-group.

Results: In total, 1,446 patients were included: 482 treated with FSS and 964 with a (radical) hysterectomy; 57.5% had stage 1A1 or 1A2, and 42.5% had IB1 or IB2 cervical cancer. The median follow-up was 8.9 years (IQR, 4.4-13.7). During the study period, 4.8% of patients developed a recurrence: 7.1% in the fertility-sparing group and 3.6% in the hysterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR], 2.21 [95% CI, 1.38 to 3.56]).The OS in both groups did not differ (HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.80]).

Conclusion: Women treated with FSS had a significantly higher recurrence rate than patients who had the uterus completely removed. However, since the increased recurrence rate did not affect OS, fertility-sparing surgery appears to be a potentially safe treatment option.

早期宫颈癌保留生育能力手术与不保留生育能力手术后的生存率:一项全国性的比较研究。
目的:年轻女性早期宫颈癌保生育手术的肿瘤学安全性主要基于小系列回顾性数据,强调需要更大规模的研究来验证其安全性。方法:我们进行了一项全国性的回顾性匹配队列研究,研究对象是2000年至2022年期间在荷兰(生育保留组)接受保留生育手术(FSS、锥体活检、大环切除转化区或根根性气管切除术)的所有18-45岁的fims国际宫颈癌患者(FIGO) 2018年IA1至IB2期宫颈癌。这些患者与接受(根治性)子宫切除术的早期宫颈癌患者(子宫切除术组)的比例为1:2。对患者进行预处理FIGO 2018分期、组织学和淋巴血管间隙浸润情况的匹配。我们比较了保留生育能力组和子宫切除组的无复发生存、无疾病生存和总生存(OS)数据。结果:共纳入1446例患者:482例接受FSS治疗,964例(根治性)子宫切除术;57.5%为1A1或1A2期宫颈癌,42.5%为IB1或IB2期宫颈癌。中位随访时间为8.9年(IQR, 4.4-13.7)。在研究期间,4.8%的患者复发:保留生育能力组为7.1%,子宫切除术组为3.6%(风险比[HR], 2.21 [95% CI, 1.38 ~ 3.56])。两组的OS无差异(HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.62 ~ 1.80])。结论:FSS治疗的女性复发率明显高于完全切除子宫的患者。然而,由于复发率的增加不影响OS,保留生育能力的手术似乎是一种潜在的安全治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
518
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信