Citations

Purpose To compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) with each other and to International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) clinical staging in the pretreatment evaluation of early invasive cervical cancer, using surgicopathologic findings as the reference standard. Patients and Methods This prospective multicenter clinical study was conducted by the American College of Radiology Imaging Network and the Gynecologic Oncology Group from March 2000 to November 2002; 25 United States health centers enrolled 208 consecutive patients with biopsy-confirmed cervical cancer of FIGO stage ≥ IB who were scheduled for surgery based on clinical assessment. Patients underwent FIGO clinical staging, helical CT, and MRI. Surgicopathologic findings constituted the reference standard for statistical analysis. Results Complete data were available for 172 patients; surgicopathologic findings were consistent with FIGO stages IA to IIA in 76% and stage ≥ IIB in 21%. For the detection of advanced stage (≥ IIB), sensitivity was poor for FIGO clinical staging (29%), CT (42%), and MRI (53%); specificity was 99% for FIGO clinical staging, 82% for CT, and 74% for MRI; and negative predictive value was 84% for FIGO clinical staging, 84% for CT, and 85% for MRI. MRI (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.88) was significantly better than CT (AUC, 0.73) for detecting cervical tumors (P = .014). For 85% of patients, FIGO clinical staging forms were submitted after MRI and/or CT was performed. Conclusion CT and MRI performed similarly; both had lower staging accuracy than in prior single-institution studies. Accuracy of FIGO clinical staging was higher than previously reported. The temporal data suggest that FIGO clinical staging was influenced by CT and MRI findings.

Purpose A traditional end point for colon adjuvant clinical trials is overall survival (OS), with 5 years demonstrating adequate follow-up. A shorter-term end point providing convincing evidence to allow treatment comparisons could significantly speed the translation of advances into practice. Methods Individual patient data were pooled from 18 randomized phase III colon cancer adjuvant clinical trials. Trials included 43 arms, with a pooled sample size of 20,898 patients. The primary hypothesis was that disease-free survival (DFS), with 3 years of follow-up, is an appropriate primary end point to replace OS with 5 years of follow-up. Results The recurrence rates for years 1 through 5 were 12%, 14%, 8%, 5%, and 3%, respectively. Median time from recurrence to death was 12 months. Eighty percent of recurrences were in the first 3 years; 91% of patients with recurrence by 3 years died before 5 years. Correlation between 3-year DFS and 5-year OS was 0.89. Comparing control versus experimental arms within each trial, the correlation between hazard ratios for DFS and OS was 0.92. Within-trial log-rank testing using both DFS and OS provided the same conclusion in 23 (92%) of 25 cases. Formal measures of surrogacy were satisfied. Conclusion In patients treated on phase III adjuvant colon clinical trials, DFS and OS are highly correlated, both within patients and across trials. These results suggest that DFS after 3 years of median follow-up is an appropriate end point for adjuvant colon cancer clinical trials of fluorouracil-based regimens, although marginally significant DFS improvements may not translate into significant OS benefits.

Purpose To review the current utilization of diagnostic tests prescribed by the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) clinical staging guidelines in the pretreatment work-up of invasive cervical cancer, and to compare the data with those of previous patterns of care studies. Patients and Methods This interdisciplinary American College of Radiology Imaging Network/Gynecologic Oncology Group prospective clinical trial was conducted between March 1, 2000, and November 11, 2002. Twenty-five participating institutions, all from the United States, enrolled a total of 208 patients. Only patients scheduled for surgery with biopsy-confirmed cervical cancer of clinical FIGO stage IB or higher were eligible. The patterns of care data analysis was based on 197 patients who met all inclusion criteria. The conventional FIGO-recommended tests used for pre-enrollment FIGO clinical stage classification were at the discretion of the treating physician; overall frequency of use was tabulated for each test. Results Use of cystoscopy (8.1%) and sigmoidoscopy or proctoscopy (8.6%) was significantly lower than in 1988 to 1989 (P < .0001 in each instance). Intravenous urography was used in only 1% of patients as compared with 42% in 1988 to 1989 and 91% in 1983. No patient included in the data analysis had barium enema or lymphangiography. Only 26.9% of patients had examination under anesthesia for FIGO clinical staging. Conclusion There is a large discrepancy between the diagnostic tests recommended by FIGO and the actual tests used for cervical cancer staging, suggesting a need to reassess the relevance of the FIGO guidelines to current clinical practice in the United States.

Purpose To prospectively assess the impact of treatment with cisplatin alone or in combination with topotecan (CT) on quality of life (QOL) in patients with advanced or recurrent cervical cancer, and to explore the prognostic value of baseline QOL scores. Patients and Methods Patients entered on Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) Protocol 179 were expected to complete QOL assessments at four time points using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General (FACT-G), Cervix subscale (Cx subscale), FACT/GOG–Neurotoxicity subscale (NTX subscale), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), and UNISCALE (UNI). Adjusting for patient age, baseline scores, and effects of time, we longitudinally examined treatment effect on QOL during and after chemotherapy. Results Among patients randomly allocated to receive cisplatin (n = 146) or CT (n = 147), there were no statistically significant differences in QOL up to 9 months after randomization despite more hematologic toxicity in the combination arm. QOL assessments were completed at rates of 98%, 85%, 68%, and 59%, respectively, for the four time points, with similar rates and reasons for nonparticipation between regimens. Baseline FACT-G (P = .0016) and BPI (P = .0001) scores were significantly associated with patient age; older patients had better QOL and less pain. Baseline UNI was positively correlated with FACT-G (r = 0.66; P < .001) and Cx subscale (r = 0.29; P < .001), and negatively related to BPI (r = −0.41; P < .0001). Baseline FACT-Cx (FACT-G + Cx subscale) was associated with survival. Conclusion Despite increased toxicity, CT did not significantly reduce patient QOL when compared with cisplatin alone. Patient-reported QOL measures may be an important prognostic tool in advanced cervix cancer.

Purpose On the basis of reported activity of methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) or topotecan plus cisplatin in advanced cervix cancer, we undertook a randomized trial comparing these combinations versus cisplatin alone, to determine whether survival is improved with either combination compared with cisplatin alone, and to compare toxicities and quality of life (QOL) among the regimens. Patients and Methods Eligible patients were randomly allocated to receive cisplatin 50 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (CPT); cisplatin 50 mg/m2 day 1 plus topotecan 0.75 mg/m2 days 1 to 3 every 3 weeks (CT); or methotrexate 30 mg/m2 days 1, 15, and 22, vinblastine 3 mg/m2 days 2, 15, and 22, doxorubicin 30 mg/m2 day 2, and cisplatin 70 mg/m2 day 2 every 4 weeks (MVAC). Survival was the primary end point; response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) were secondary end points. QOL data are reported separately. Results The MVAC arm was closed by the Data Safety Monitoring Board after four treatment-related deaths occurred among 63 patients, and is not included in this analysis. Two hundred ninety-four patients enrolled onto the remaining regimens: 146 to CPT and 147 to CT. Grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicity was more common with CT. Patients receiving CT had statistically superior outcomes to those receiving CPT, with median overall survival of 9.4 and 6.5 months (P = .017), median PFS of 4.6 and 2.9 months (P = .014), and response rates of 27% and 13%, respectively. Conclusion This is the first randomized phase III trial to demonstrate a survival advantage for combination chemotherapy over cisplatin alone in advanced cervix cancer.

Purpose: To determine if increasing the dose of paclitaxel increases the probability of clinical response, progression-free survival, or overall survival in women who have persistent or recurrent ovarian cancer, and whether doubling the dose of prophylactic filgrastim accompanying the higher paclitaxel dose decreases the frequency of neutropenic fever. Patients and Methods: Consenting patients with persistent, recurrent, or progressing ovarian cancer, despite first-line platinum therapy (but no prior taxane), were randomly assigned to paclitaxel 135 mg/m2, 175 mg/m2, or 250 mg/m2 over 24 hours every 3 weeks. Patients receiving paclitaxel 250 mg/m2 were also randomly assigned to 5 or 10 μg/kg of filgrastim per day subcutaneously. Results: Accession to the paclitaxel 135-mg/m2 arm was closed early. Among the 271 patients on the other regimens with measurable disease, partial and complete response on paclitaxel 250 mg/m2 (36%) was significantly higher than on 175 mg/m2 (27%, P = .027). This difference was more evident among patients who never responded to prior platinum. However, progression-free and overall survival results were similar. The median durations of overall survival were 13.1 and 12.3 months for paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 and 250 mg/m2, respectively. Thrombocytopenia, neuropathy, and myalgia were greater with paclitaxel 250 mg/m2 (P < .05). The incidence of neutropenic fever after the first cycle of paclitaxel 250 mg/m2 was 19% and 18% on the 5-μg/kg and 10-μg/kg filgrastim dose, respectively (22% for paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 without filgrastim). Conclusion: Paclitaxel exhibits a dose effect with regard to response rate, but there is more toxicity and no survival benefit to justify paclitaxel 250 mg/m2 plus filgrastim. Doubling the filgrastim dose from 5 to 10 μg/kg did not reduce the probability of neutropenic fever after high-dose paclitaxel.