Objective: We aimed to assess the prognostic value of preoperative ultrasound tumor size in EC through a single center, observational, retrospective, cohort study. Methods: Medical records and electronic clinical databases were searched for all consecutive patients with EC, preoperative ultrasound scans available to ad hoc estimate tumor size, and a follow-up of at least 2-year, at our Institution from January 2010 to June 2018. Patients were divided into two groups based on different dimensional cut-offs for the maximum tumor diameter: 2, 3 and 4 cm. Differences in overall survival (OS), disease specific survival (DSS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed among the groups by using the Kaplan–Meier estimator and the log-rank test. Results: 108 patients were included in the study. OS, DSS and PFS did not significantly differ between the groups based on the different tumor diameter cut-offs. No significant differences were found among the groups sub-stratified by age, BMI, FIGO stage, FIGO grade, lymphovascular space invasion status, myometrial invasion, lymph nodal involvement, histotype, and adjuvant treatment. Conclusions: Preoperative ultrasound tumor size does not appear as a prognostic factor in EC women.

Is preoperative ultrasound tumor size a prognostic factor in endometrial carcinoma patients?

Travaglino A;
2022-01-01

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to assess the prognostic value of preoperative ultrasound tumor size in EC through a single center, observational, retrospective, cohort study. Methods: Medical records and electronic clinical databases were searched for all consecutive patients with EC, preoperative ultrasound scans available to ad hoc estimate tumor size, and a follow-up of at least 2-year, at our Institution from January 2010 to June 2018. Patients were divided into two groups based on different dimensional cut-offs for the maximum tumor diameter: 2, 3 and 4 cm. Differences in overall survival (OS), disease specific survival (DSS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed among the groups by using the Kaplan–Meier estimator and the log-rank test. Results: 108 patients were included in the study. OS, DSS and PFS did not significantly differ between the groups based on the different tumor diameter cut-offs. No significant differences were found among the groups sub-stratified by age, BMI, FIGO stage, FIGO grade, lymphovascular space invasion status, myometrial invasion, lymph nodal involvement, histotype, and adjuvant treatment. Conclusions: Preoperative ultrasound tumor size does not appear as a prognostic factor in EC women.
2022
2022
cancer; death; prognosis; recurrence; relapse; risk assessment; tumor
Ambrosio, M; Raffone, A; Alletto, A; Cini, C; Filipponi, F; Neola, D; Fabbri, M; Arena, A; Raimondo, D; Salucci, P; Guerrini, M; Travaglino, A; Paradisi, R; Mollo, A; Seracchioli, R; Casadio, P
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
fonc-12-993629.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.58 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.58 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11383/2166195
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 4
  • Scopus 4
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 4
social impact