Anthracycline-based and gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting for stage I uterine leiomyosarcoma: a retrospective analysis at two reference centers

  • Fucà G
  • Fabbroni C
  • Mancari R
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Radically resected early uterine leiomyosarcoma (eULMS) is still marked by a poor prognosis. Adjuvant strategies investigated up to now have not been corroborated by controlled studies. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcome of eULMS patients treated with adjuvant anthracycline-based or gemcitabine-based chemotherapy at two Italian reference centers. In this explorative, retrospective, cohort analysis, we included all the consecutive patients with radically resected eULMS treated at two centers between 1997 and 2017. A total of 109 consecutive patients were included. Sixty-six (60%) received an anthracycline-based regimen, whereas 43 (40%) received a gemcitabine-based regimen. Median disease-free survival (DFS) was 41.3 months with anthracycline-based regimens compared to 20.9 months with gemcitabine-based regimens (HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.30–0.80; P = 0.004). In the multivariable model, anthracycline-based regimens were independently associated with a better DFS. No difference in terms of overall survival was observed. DFS was not the same by using an anthracycline-based or a gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with radically resected eULMS. The results of our study are in line with recent prospective controlled evidence in limb and superficial trunk soft tissue sarcomas. The role of anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy should still be viewed as a research issue in eULMS.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fucà, G., Fabbroni, C., Mancari, R., Manglaviti, S., Bogani, G., Fumagalli, E., … Sanfilippo, R. (2020). Anthracycline-based and gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting for stage I uterine leiomyosarcoma: a retrospective analysis at two reference centers. Clinical Sarcoma Research, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13569-020-00139-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free