ESTRO meets Asia 2024 - Abstract Book

S142

Interdisciplinary – Gynaecological

ESTRO meets Asia 2024

total points derived from the nomogram, and the survival outcomes between the < 5 cycles and ≥ 5 cycles groups were compared in each risk strata.

Results:

The 5-year OS and DFS were 76.7% (95% CI: 74.3–79.9%) and 86.1% (95% CI: 84.6–87.6%) ( p = 0.002) and 68.7% (95% CI: 66.1%–71.3%) and 78.3% (95%CI: 76.6%–80.0%) ( p = 0.0016) for the < 5 and ≥ 5 cycles groups, respectively. In subgroup analysis, the survival benefit of ≥ 5 cycles could be maintained in patients with squamous disease ( p = 0.0031 in OS; p = 0.0019 in DFS), patients with SCC > 1.5 ng/mL ( p = 0.0096 in OS; p = 0.019 in DFS), patients with tumor size > 4 cm ( p = 0.0036 in OS; p = 0.0011 in DFS), and patients with stage I/II disease ( p = 0.0041 in OS; p = 0.014 in DFS). A nomogram incorporating size, SCCAg, and FIGO stage was constructed, and patients were divided into two risk groups (low-risk: total points < 101; high-risk: total points ≥ 101). Receiving ≥ 5 cycles showed superiority in OS ( p = 0.0025) and DFS ( p = 0.008) over < 5 cycles in the low-risk subgroup; however, this survival benefit could not be maintained in the high-risk subgroup ( p = 0.130 in OS; p =0.093 in DFS).

Conclusion:

Receiving ≥ 5 cycles of cisplatin improved OS and DFS in LACC patients who received CCRT when compared with < 5 cycles. A nomogram was constructed, and the newly defined low-risk patients might gain significant OS and DFS benefit from receiving ≥ 5 cycles .

Keywords: Cervical cancer, cisplatin cycles, nomogram

References:

[1] SUNG H, FERLAY J, SIEGEL R L, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries [J]. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2021, 71(3): 209-49. [2] CHEN W, ZHENG R, BAADE P D, et al. Cancer statistics in China, 2015 [J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2016, 66(2): 115-32. [3] CIBULA D, POTTER R, PLANCHAMP F, et al. The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer [J]. Radiother Oncol, 2018, 127(3): 404-16. [4] MORRIS M, EIFEL, PJ, LU, J, ET AL. Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high-risk cervical cancer [J]. NEW ENGL J MED, 1999, 340 (15): 1137-43. [5] ROSE P, BUNDY, BN, WATKINS, EB, ET AL. Concurrent cisplatin-based radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer [J]. NEW ENGL J MED, 1999, 340 (15): 1144-53. [6] CHEN X, ZOU, H, LI, H, ET AL. Weekly Versus Triweekly Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy Concurrent With Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Cervical Cancer: A Meta-Analysis [J]. INT J GYNECOL CANCER, 2017, 27 (2): 344 349. [7] SHAHID F, FAROOQUI Z, KHAN F. Cisplatin-induced gastrointestinal toxicity: An update on possible mechanisms and on available gastroprotective strategies [J]. Eur J Pharmacol, 2018, 827: 49-57. [8] ROSE P G, ALI S, WATKINS E, et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized trial comparing concurrent single agent cisplatin, cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy, or hydroxyurea during pelvic irradiation for locally advanced cervical cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2007, 25(19): 2804-10. [9] XIANG M, KIDD E A. Benefit of Cisplatin With Definitive Radiotherapy in Older Women With Cervical Cancer [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2019, 17(8): 969-75. [10] ZENG Z, WANG W, LIU X, et al. Optimal cisplatin cycles in locally advanced cervical carcinoma patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy [J]. Clin Transl Oncol, 2023, 25 (10): 2892-2900. [11] CAMP R, DOLLED-FILHART, M, RIMM, DL. X-tile: a new bio-informatics tool for biomarker assessment and outcome-based cut-point optimization [J]. CLIN CANCER RES, 2004, 10 (21): 7252-9. [12] ABU-RUSTUM NR Y C, AREND R, ET AL. NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Cervical Cancer, Version 1.2024 [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2023, 21(12):1224-1233.