Journal List > J Gynecol Oncol > v.20(2) > 1078829

Kim, Chang, and Ryu: In reply
We are grateful to Dr. Kim for interest and advice in our article. We admit that the criteria of dividing patients into two groups in this study were somewhat arbitrary.
Generally the major prognostic factors for patients having radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for stages IB to IIA cervical cancer are as follows:
Lymph node status, size of primary tumor, depth of stromal invasion, lymph-vascular space invasion, parametrial extension, histologic type, and resection margin status.
We know that univariate and multivariate analysis is required before subgrouping the each criteria in this study. However, the number of patients was too small for such analysis in this study, and these criteria are already known to have poorer prognosis in other studies.1-6 So, we subgrouped the three critera based on the previous report.
We also know that there is not any definite evidence of survival nor disease free benefit of consolidation chemotherapy after adjuvant concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT). The only report about the consolidation chemotherapy after CCRT by Lee et al.7 dealt with small number of patients (25 vs. 15) but is not enough for disregarding the trial of consolidation treatment. I also agree with you that we cannot say there is any beneficial role in consolidation chemotherapy after CCRT until the result of other prospective study is published.

References

1. Piver MS, Chung WS. Prognostic significance of cervical lesion size and pelvic node metastases in cervical carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol. 1975. 46:507–510.
2. Hsu CT, Cheng YS, Su SC. Prognosis of uterine cervical cancer with extensive lymph node metastases: special emphasis on the value of pelvic lymphadenectomy in the surgical treatment of uterine cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1972. 114:954–962.
3. Nahhas WA, Sharkey FE, Whitney CW, Husseinzadeh N, Chung CK, Mortel R. The prognostic significance of vascular channel involvement and deep stromal penetration in early cervical carcinoma. Am J Clin Oncol. 1983. 6:259–264.
4. Martimbeau PW, Kjorstad KE, Iversen T. Stage IB carcinoma of the cervix, the Norwegian Radium hospital: II. Results when pelvic nodes are involved. Obstet Gynecol. 1982. 60:215–218.
5. Van Nagel JR Jr, Donaldson ES, Parker JC, Van Dyke AH, Wood EG. The prognostic significance of cell type and lesion size in patients with cervical cancer treated by radical surgery. Gynecol Oncol. 1977. 5:142–151.
6. Delgado G, Bundy B, Zaino R, Sevin BU, Creasman WT, Major F. Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. 1990. 38:352–357.
7. Lee JW, Kim BG, Lee SJ, Lee SH, Park CS, Lee JH, et al. Preliminary results of consolidation chemotherapy following concurrent chemoradiation after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2005. 17:412–417.
TOOLS
ORCID iDs

Suk-Joon Chang
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0558-0038

Similar articles