Published in

JCO Global Oncology, 6, p. 1510-1518, 2020

DOI: 10.1200/go.20.00303

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Comparison of Definitive Cervical Cancer Management With Chemotherapy and Radiation Between Two Centers With Variable Resources and Opportunities for Improved Treatment

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

PURPOSE Cervical cancer remains a major health challenge in low- to middle-income countries. We present the experiences of two centers practicing in variable resource environments to determine predictors of improved radiochemotherapy treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS This comparative review describes cervical cancer presentation and treatment with concurrent chemoradiotherapy with high-dose-rate brachytherapy between 2014 and 2017 at the National Radiotherapy Oncology and Nuclear Medicine Center (NRONMC) in Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra, Ghana, and Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC), Tampa, FL. RESULTS Median follow-up for this study was 16.9 months. NRONMC patients presented with predominantly stage III disease (42% v 16%; P = .002). MCC patients received para-aortic node irradiation (16%) and interstitial brachytherapy implants (19%). Median treatment duration was longer for NRONMC patients compared with MCC patients (59 v 52 days; P < .0001), and treatment duration ≥ 55 days predicted worse survival on multivariable analysis (MVA; P = .02). Stage ≥ III disease predicted poorer local control on MVA. There was a difference in local control among patients with stage III disease (58% v 91%; P = .03) but not in survival between MCC and NRONMC. No significant difference in local control was observed for stage IB, IIA, and IIB disease. CONCLUSION Although there were significant differences in disease presentation between the two centers, treatment outcomes were similar for patients with early-stage disease. Longer treatment duration and stage ≥ III disease predicted poor outcomes.