PURPOSEThe molecular classification of endometrial cancer (EC) has proven to have prognostic value and is predictive of response to adjuvant chemotherapy. Here, we investigate its predictive value... Show morePURPOSEThe molecular classification of endometrial cancer (EC) has proven to have prognostic value and is predictive of response to adjuvant chemotherapy. Here, we investigate its predictive value for response to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) in early-stage endometrioid EC (EEC).METHODSData of the randomized PORTEC-1 trial (n = 714) comparing pelvic EBRT with no adjuvant therapy in early-stage intermediate-risk EC and the PORTEC-2 trial (n = 427) comparing VBT with EBRT in early-stage high-intermediate-risk EC were used. Locoregional (including vaginal and pelvic) recurrence-free survival was compared between treatment groups across the four molecular classes using Kaplan-Meier's methodology and log-rank tests.RESULTSA total of 880 molecularly classified ECs, 484 from PORTEC-1 and 396 from PORTEC-2, were included. The majority were FIGO-2009 stage I EEC (97.2%). The median follow-up was 11.3 years. No locoregional recurrences were observed in EC with a pathogenic mutation of DNA polymerase-ε (POLEmut EC). In mismatch repair–deficient (MMRd) EC, locoregional recurrence-free survival was similar after EBRT (94.2%), VBT (94.2%), and no adjuvant therapy (90.3%; P = .74). In EC with a p53 abnormality (p53abn EC), EBRT (96.9%) had a substantial benefit over VBT (64.3%) and no adjuvant therapy (72.2%; P = .048). In EC with no specific molecular profile (NSMP EC), both EBRT (98.3%) and VBT (96.2%) yielded better locoregional control than no adjuvant therapy (87.7%; P < .0001).CONCLUSIONThe molecular classification of EC predicts response to radiotherapy in stage I EEC and may guide adjuvant treatment decisions. Omitting radiotherapy seems to be safe in POLEmut EC. The benefit of radiotherapy seems to be limited in MMRd EC. EBRT yields a significantly better locoregional recurrence-free survival than VBT or no adjuvant therapy in p53abn EC. VBT is the treatment of choice for NSMP EC as it is as effective as EBRT and significantly better than no adjuvant therapy for locoregional tumor control. Show less
Wortman, B.G.; Astreinidou, E.; Laman, M.S.; Steen-Banasik, E.M. van der; Lutgens, L.C.H.W.; Westerveld, H.; ... ; PORTEC Study Grp 2021
AbstractBACKGROUND:The PORTEC-3 trial investigated the benefit of combined adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy versus pelvic radiotherapy alone for women with high-risk endometrial cancer. We... Show moreAbstractBACKGROUND:The PORTEC-3 trial investigated the benefit of combined adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy versus pelvic radiotherapy alone for women with high-risk endometrial cancer. We updated the analysis to investigate patterns of recurrence and did a post-hoc survival analysis.METHODS:In the multicentre randomised phase 3 PORTEC-3 trial, women with high-risk endometrial cancer were eligible if they had International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage I, endometrioid grade 3 cancer with deep myometrial invasion or lymphovascular space invasion, or both; stage II or III disease; or stage I-III disease with serous or clear cell histology; were aged 18 years and older; and had a WHO performance status of 0-2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive radiotherapy alone (48·6 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions given on 5 days per week) or chemoradiotherapy (two cycles of cisplatin 50 mg/m2 given intravenously during radiotherapy, followed by four cycles of carboplatin AUC5 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 given intravenously), by use of a biased coin minimisation procedure with stratification for participating centre, lymphadenectomy, stage, and histological type. The co-primary endpoints were overall survival and failure-free survival. Secondary endpoints of vaginal, pelvic, and distant recurrence were analysed according to the first site of recurrence. Survival endpoints were analysed by intention-to-treat, and adjusted for stratification factors. Competing risk methods were used for failure-free survival and recurrence. We did a post-hoc analysis to analyse patterns of recurrence with 1 additional year of follow-up. The study was closed on Dec 20, 2013; follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN14387080, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00411138.FINDINGS:Between Nov 23, 2006, and Dec 20, 2013, 686 women were enrolled, of whom 660 were eligible and evaluable (330 in the chemoradiotherapy group, and 330 in the radiotherapy-alone group). At a median follow-up of 72·6 months (IQR 59·9-85·6), 5-year overall survival was 81·4% (95% CI 77·2-85·8) with chemoradiotherapy versus 76·1% (71·6-80·9) with radiotherapy alone (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·51-0·97], p=0·034), and 5-year failure-free survival was 76·5% (95% CI 71·5-80·7) versus 69·1% (63·8-73·8; HR 0·70 [0·52-0·94], p=0·016). Distant metastases were the first site of recurrence in most patients with a relapse, occurring in 78 of 330 women (5-year probability 21·4%; 95% CI 17·3-26·3) in the chemoradiotherapy group versus 98 of 330 (5-year probability 29·1%; 24·4-34·3) in the radiotherapy-alone group (HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·55-0·99]; p=0·047). Isolated vaginal recurrence was the first site of recurrence in one patient (0·3%; 95% CI 0·0-2·1) in both groups (HR 0·99 [95% CI 0·06-15·90]; p=0·99), and isolated pelvic recurrence was the first site of recurrence in three women (0·9% [95% CI 0·3-2·8]) in the chemoradiotherapy group versus four (0·9% [95% CI 0·3-2·8]) in the radiotherapy-alone group (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·17-3·33]; p=0·71). At 5 years, only one grade 4 adverse event (ileus or obstruction) was reported (in the chemoradiotherapy group). At 5 years, reported grade 3 adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups, occurring in 16 (8%) of 201 women in the chemoradiotherapy group versus ten (5%) of 187 in the radiotherapy-alone group (p=0·24). The most common grade 3 adverse event was hypertension (in four [2%] women in both groups). At 5 years, grade 2 or worse adverse events were reported in 76 (38%) of 201 women in the chemoradiotherapy group versus 43 (23%) of 187 in the radiotherapy-alone group (p=0·002). Sensory neuropathy persisted more often after chemoradiotherapy than after radiotherapy alone, with 5-year rates of grade 2 or worse neuropathy of 6% (13 of 201 women) versus 0% (0 of 187). No treatment-related deaths were reported.INTERPRETATION:This updated analysis shows significantly improved overall survival and failure-free survival with chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone. This treatment schedule should be discussed and recommended, especially for women with stage III or serous cancers, or both, as part of shared decision making between doctors and patients. Follow-up is ongoing to evaluate long-term survival.FUNDING:Dutch Cancer Society, Cancer Research UK, National Health and Medical Research Council, Project Grant, Cancer Australia Grant, Italian Medicines Agency, and the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute. Show less
Wortman, B.G.; Bosse, T.; Nout, R.A.; Lutgens, L.C.H.W.; Steen-Banasik, E.M. van der; Westerveld, H.; ... ; PORTEC Study Grp 2018
AbstractBackground: In the PORTEC-3 trial, women with high-risk endometrial cancer (HR-EC) were randomised to receive pelvic radiotherapy (RT) with or without concurrent and adjuvant chemotherapy ... Show moreAbstractBackground: In the PORTEC-3 trial, women with high-risk endometrial cancer (HR-EC) were randomised to receive pelvic radiotherapy (RT) with or without concurrent and adjuvant chemotherapy (two cycles of cisplatin 50 mg/m2 in weeks 1 and 4 of RT, followed by four cycles of carboplatin AUC5 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2). Pathology review was required before patient enrolment. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the role of central pathology review before randomisation.Patients and methods: A total of 1295 cases underwent pathology review to confirm HR-EC in the Netherlands (n = 395) and the UK (n = 900), and for 1226/1295 (95%) matching review and original reports were available. In total, 329 of these patients were enrolled in the PORTEC-3 trial: 145 in the Netherlands and 184 in the UK, comprising 48% of the total PORTEC-3 cohort of 686 participants. Areas of discrepancies were evaluated, and inter-observer agreement between original and review opinion was evaluated by calculating the kappa value (κ).Results: In the 1226 pathology reviews, 6356 selected items were evaluable for both original and review pathology. In 43% of cases at least one pathology item changed after review. For 102 patients (8%), this discrepancy led to ineligibility for the PORTEC-3 trial, most frequently due to differences in the assessment of histological type (34%), endocervical stromal involvement (27%) and histological grade (19%). Lowest inter-observer agreement was found for histological type (κ = 0.72), lymph-vascular space invasion (κ = 0.72) and histological grade (κ = 0.70).Conclusion: Central pathology review by expert gynaeco-pathologists changed histological type, grade or other items in 43% of women with HR-EC, leading to ineligibility for the PORTEC-3 trial in 8%. Upfront pathology review is essential to ensure enrolment of the target trial-population, and to avoid over- or undertreatment, especially when treatment modalities with substantial toxicity are involved. This study is registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN14387080, www.controlled-trials.com) and with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00411138). Show less
PURPOSE To evaluate the very long-term results of the randomized Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma (PORTEC)-1 trial for patients with Stage I endometrial carcinoma (EC),... Show morePURPOSE To evaluate the very long-term results of the randomized Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma (PORTEC)-1 trial for patients with Stage I endometrial carcinoma (EC), focusing on the role of prognostic factors for treatment selection and the long-term risk of second cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS The PORTEC trial (1990-1997) included 714 patients with Stage IC Grade 1-2 or Stage IB Grade 2-3 EC. After surgery, patients were randomly allocated to external-beam pelvic radiotherapy (EBRT) or no additional treatment (NAT). Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS 426 patients were alive at the date of analysis. The median follow-up time was 13.3 years. The 15-year actuarial locoregional recurrence (LRR) rates were 6% for EBRT vs. 15.5% for NAT (p < 0.0001). The 15-year overall survival was 52% vs. 60% (p = 0.14), and the failure-free survival was 50% vs. 54% (p = 0.94). For patients with high-intermediate risk criteria, the 15-year overall survival was 41% vs. 48% (p = 0.51), and the 15-year EC-related death was 14% vs. 13%. Most LRR in the NAT group were vaginal recurrences (11.0% of 15.5%). The 15-year rates of distant metastases were 9% vs. 7% (p = 0.25). Second primary cancers had been diagnosed over 15 years in 19% of all patients, 22% vs. 16% for EBRT vs. NAT (p = 0.10), with observed vs. expected ratios of 1.6 (EBRT) and 1.2 (NAT) compared with a matched population (p = NS). Multivariate analysis confirmed the prognostic significance of Grade 3 for LRR (hazard ratio [HR] 3.4, p = 0.0003) and for EC death (HR 7.3, p < 0.0001), of age >60 (HR 3.9, p = 0.002 for LRR and 2.7, p = 0.01 for EC death) and myometrial invasion >50% (HR 1.9, p = 0.03 and HR 1.9, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS The 15-year outcomes of PORTEC-1 confirm the relevance of HIR criteria for treatment selection, and a trend for long-term risk of second cancers. EBRT should be avoided in patients with low- and intermediate-risk EC. Show less
BACKGROUND: After surgery for intermediate-risk endometrial carcinoma, the vagina is the most frequent site of recurrence. This study established whether vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) is as effective... Show moreBACKGROUND: After surgery for intermediate-risk endometrial carcinoma, the vagina is the most frequent site of recurrence. This study established whether vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) is as effective as pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in prevention of vaginal recurrence, with fewer adverse effects and improved quality of life. METHODS: In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial undertaken in 19 Dutch radiation oncology centres, 427 patients with stage I or IIA endometrial carcinoma with features of high-intermediate risk were randomly assigned by a computer-generated, biased coin minimisation procedure to pelvic EBRT (46 Gy in 23 fractions; n=214) or VBT (21 Gy high-dose rate in three fractions, or 30 Gy low-dose rate; n=213). All investigators were masked to the assignment of treatment group. The primary endpoint was vaginal recurrence. The predefined non-inferiority margin was an absolute difference of 6% in vaginal recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat, with competing risk methods. The study is registered, number ISRCTN16228756. FINDINGS: At median follow-up of 45 months (range 18-78), three vaginal recurrences had been diagnosed after VBT and four after EBRT. Estimated 5-year rates of vaginal recurrence were 1.8% (95% CI 0.6-5.9) for VBT and 1.6% (0.5-4.9) for EBRT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.17-3.49; p=0.74). 5-year rates of locoregional relapse (vaginal or pelvic recurrence, or both) were 5.1% (2.8-9.6) for VBT and 2.1% (0.8-5.8) for EBRT (HR 2.08, 0.71-6.09; p=0.17). 1.5% (0.5-4.5) versus 0.5% (0.1-3.4) of patients presented with isolated pelvic recurrence (HR 3.10, 0.32-29.9; p=0.30), and rates of distant metastases were similar (8.3% [5.1-13.4] vs 5.7% [3.3-9.9]; HR 1.32, 0.63-2.74; p=0.46). We recorded no differences in overall (84.8% [95% CI 79.3-90.3] vs 79.6% [71.2-88.0]; HR 1.17, 0.69-1.98; p=0.57) or disease-free survival (82.7% [76.9-88.6] vs 78.1% [69.7-86.5]; HR 1.09, 0.66-1.78; p=0.74). Rates of acute grade 1-2 gastrointestinal toxicity were significantly lower in the VBT group than in the EBRT group at completion of radiotherapy (12.6% [27/215] vs 53.8% [112/208]). INTERPRETATION: VBT is effective in ensuring vaginal control, with fewer gastrointestinal toxic effects than with EBRT. VBT should be the adjuvant treatment of choice for patients with endometrial carcinoma of high-intermediate risk. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Society. Show less
BACKGROUND: After surgery for intermediate-risk endometrial carcinoma, the vagina is the most frequent site of recurrence. This study established whether vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) is as effective... Show moreBACKGROUND: After surgery for intermediate-risk endometrial carcinoma, the vagina is the most frequent site of recurrence. This study established whether vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) is as effective as pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in prevention of vaginal recurrence, with fewer adverse effects and improved quality of life. METHODS: In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial undertaken in 19 Dutch radiation oncology centres, 427 patients with stage I or IIA endometrial carcinoma with features of high-intermediate risk were randomly assigned by a computer-generated, biased coin minimisation procedure to pelvic EBRT (46 Gy in 23 fractions; n=214) or VBT (21 Gy high-dose rate in three fractions, or 30 Gy low-dose rate; n=213). All investigators were masked to the assignment of treatment group. The primary endpoint was vaginal recurrence. The predefined non-inferiority margin was an absolute difference of 6% in vaginal recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat, with competing risk methods. The study is registered, number ISRCTN16228756. FINDINGS: At median follow-up of 45 months (range 18-78), three vaginal recurrences had been diagnosed after VBT and four after EBRT. Estimated 5-year rates of vaginal recurrence were 1.8% (95% CI 0.6-5.9) for VBT and 1.6% (0.5-4.9) for EBRT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.17-3.49; p=0.74). 5-year rates of locoregional relapse (vaginal or pelvic recurrence, or both) were 5.1% (2.8-9.6) for VBT and 2.1% (0.8-5.8) for EBRT (HR 2.08, 0.71-6.09; p=0.17). 1.5% (0.5-4.5) versus 0.5% (0.1-3.4) of patients presented with isolated pelvic recurrence (HR 3.10, 0.32-29.9; p=0.30), and rates of distant metastases were similar (8.3% [5.1-13.4] vs 5.7% [3.3-9.9]; HR 1.32, 0.63-2.74; p=0.46). We recorded no differences in overall (84.8% [95% CI 79.3-90.3] vs 79.6% [71.2-88.0]; HR 1.17, 0.69-1.98; p=0.57) or disease-free survival (82.7% [76.9-88.6] vs 78.1% [69.7-86.5]; HR 1.09, 0.66-1.78; p=0.74). Rates of acute grade 1-2 gastrointestinal toxicity were significantly lower in the VBT group than in the EBRT group at completion of radiotherapy (12.6% [27/215] vs 53.8% [112/208]). INTERPRETATION: VBT is effective in ensuring vaginal control, with fewer gastrointestinal toxic effects than with EBRT. VBT should be the adjuvant treatment of choice for patients with endometrial carcinoma of high-intermediate risk. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Society. Show less
Background After surgery for intermediate-risk endometrial carcinoma, the vagina is the most frequent site of recurrence. This study established whether vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) is as effective... Show moreBackground After surgery for intermediate-risk endometrial carcinoma, the vagina is the most frequent site of recurrence. This study established whether vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) is as effective as pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in prevention of vaginal recurrence, with fewer adverse effects and improved quality of life. Methods In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial undertaken in 19 Dutch radiation oncology centres, 427 patients with stage I or IIA endometrial carcinoma with features of high-intermediate risk were randomly assigned by a computer-generated, biased coin minimisation procedure to pelvic EBRT (46 Gy in 23 fractions; n=214) or VBT (21 Gy high-dose rate in three fractions, or 30 Gy low-dose rate; n=213). All investigators were masked to the assignment of treatment group. The primary endpoint was vaginal recurrence. The predefined non-inferiority margin was an absolute difference of 6% in vaginal recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat, with competing risk methods. The study is registered, number ISRCTN16228756. Findings At median follow-up of 45 months (range 18-78), three vaginal recurrences had been diagnosed after VBT and four after EBRT. Estimated 5-year rates of vaginal recurrence were 1.8% (95% CI 0.6-5.9) for VBT and 1.6% (0.5-4-9) for EBRT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% CI 0-17-3.49; p=0.74). 5-year rates of locoregional relapse (vaginal or pelvic recurrence, or both) were 5.1% (2.8-9.6) for VBT and 2.1% (0.8-5.8) for EBRT (HR 2.08,0.71-6.09; p=0.17). 1.5% (0.5-4.5) versus 0.5% (0.1-3.4) of patients presented with isolated pelvic recurrence (HR 3.10, 0.32-29.9; p=0.30), and rates of distant metastases were similar (8.3% [5.1-13.4] vs 5.7% [3.3-9.9]; HR 1.32, 0.63-2.74; p=0.46). We recorded no differences in overall (84-8% [95% CI 79.3-90.3] vs 79.6% [71.2-88.0]; HR 1.17, 0.69-1.98; p=0.57) or disease-free survival (82.7% [76.9-88.6] vs 78.1% [69.7-86.5]; HR 1.09, 0.66-1.78; p=0.74). Rates of acute grade 1-2 gastrointestinal toxicity were significantly lower in the VBT group than in the EBRT group at completion of radiotherapy (12.6% [27/215] vs 53.8% [112/208]). Interpretation VBT is effective in ensuring vaginal control, with fewer gastrointestinal toxic effects than with EBRT. VBT should be the adjuvant treatment of choice for patients with endometrial carcinoma of high-intermediate risk. Show less
