Skip to main content

The survival effect of ovary preservation in early stage endometrial cancer: a single institution retrospective analysis

Abstract

Purpose

We investigated the effect of ovary preserving surgery in early International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) stage endometrial cancer patients.

Methods

Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for 539 patients who were diagnosed with early stage endometrial cancer between Jan 2006 and Dec 2017. Patients were categorized into ovary preservation and ovary removal groups. Demographics, recurrence free survival (RFS), and five-year overall survival (OS) rate were compared, and the clinical factors affecting survival were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analysis.

Results

The median follow-up period was 85 months (range, 6–142 months), and the median age was 52.7 years. The mean age was higher in the ovary removal group than in the ovary preservation group (54.4 vs 40.94 years; P < 0.001). The ovary preservation group showed an earlier FIGO stage than the ovary removal group (P = 0.0264). There was a greater incidence of adjuvant chemotherapy administration in the removal group. There were no statistical differences in other baseline characteristics. When comparing the RFS and OS rates, there were no statistical differences between the preservation and removal groups. (recurrence free rate 98.5% vs 92.7%, p = 0.4360, and 5-year survival rate 98.6% vs 93.0%, p = 0.0892, respectively). Endometrioid histology (p = 0.006) and post-operative adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.0062) were related to OS, and adjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.001) and radiotherapy (p = 0.005) were related to RFS.

Conclusions

Ovary preservation in early stage endometrial cancer is worth considering, as it does not affect survival in early stage endometrial cancer patients.

Background

Endometrial cancer has the highest incidence in gynecological cancers in Western countries [1], and the incidence is also increasing in Korea [2]. Conversely, endometrial cancer has a higher rate of early diagnosis than other gynecologic and solid cancers because symptoms such as irregular bleeding or discharge are easily detected by patients and diagnosis is possible with a simple endometrial curettage or hysteroscopic endometrial biopsy [3].

According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, early stage endometrial cancer is treated with total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and lymph node dissection, with subsequent staging according to the pathologic report. Adjunctive total salpingo-oophorectomy is the standard treatment option, because of the possibility of occult tumor cells in the ovary and the fact that endometrial cancer is advanced by ovarian hormones [4, 5]. The incidence of ovarian tumors in patients with endometrial cancer is as 7% [6]. However, surgical menopause caused by removing the ovaries can induce other complications, such as hot flushes, night sweats, vaginal dryness, insomnia, osteoporosis, cardiovascular problem, sexual dysfunction, and cognitive problems that can affect survival and quality of life [7,8,9,10,11]. Exogenous hormone replacement therapy may relieve these menopausal symptoms but can also induce other complications [12, 13].

Meta-analysis [14] and other research [4, 5, 15, 16] on ovarian preservation surgery in young, premenopausal early stage endometrial cancer patients has produced conflicting results. Some studies claim that it is safer to remove the ovaries, although preservation of the ovary generally does not affect patient recurrence or survival. However, in some meta-analyses and reviews, much of the patient data (34.9%) is too old records [4], therefore, there is a risk of inaccurate medical records. Further, studies included incidentally diagnosed cancer patients who were regarded as having benign disease such as leiomyoma or adenomyosis prior to surgery, and only had hysterectomy planned without salpingo-oophorectomy.

In addition, many patients receive adjuvant treatment such as radiotherapy or chemotherapy after ovarian preserving surgery, which can further damage ovarian functions. These cases do not represent true ovarian preservation or help to reduce the complications of surgical menopause.

This retrospective study compares the survival of early International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) stage endometrial cancer patients who have the ovaries preserved with those who had the ovaries removed in a real clinical setting.

Methods

Medical records of patients with endometrial cancer who were newly diagnosed by endometrial biopsy and treated at National Cancer Center in South Korea between January 2006 and December 2017 were reviewed. A total of 1578 endometrial cancer patients visited our outpatient clinics; however, 497 patients visited only once for counseling or a second opinion, and 439 patients had recurrent disease. Another 103 patients were excluded due to advanced cancer status (FIGO stage III or IV), which resulted in 539 patients who had been diagnosed and treated in our center for early (FIGO stage I or II) endometrial cancer (Fig. 1). Clinical factors including age at diagnosis, FIGO stage, FIGO grade, histology of the surgically removed tissues, surgical approach method, radicality of hysterectomy, lymph node dissection, and adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy were collected.

Fig. 1
figure1

Study flow chart

Correlations of variables were assessed using the Fisher’s exact or Student t-test. Five year overall survival (OS) rates and recurrence free survival (RFS) rates were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. The log-rank test was used to compare survival curves. Cox regression analysis was performed to determine the predictive factors for prognosis with hazard ratios (HRs). P values <.05 were considered to be significant. This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board of our institution (IRB No. NCC2019–0272).

Results

The 539 patients included 469 in the ovarian removal group and 70 in the ovarian preservation group. The ovarian removal group was significantly older than the ovarian preservation group (P < 0.001). The FIGO stage was earlier in the ovarian preservation group (P = 0.0264). Lymph node dissection was more frequently performed in the ovarian removal group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of surgical approach method, radicality of hysterectomy, or the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy (Table 1). The five-year OS) and RFS) graphs showed no significant differences between ovarian preservation and removal groups (OS: 98.6% vs. 93.0%, P = 0.0892, and RFS: 98.5% vs 92.7%, P = 0.436, respectively) (Fig. 2). Adjusted univariate analysis was performed for FIGO stage and patient age. Univariate analysis demonstrated that FIGO grade, histology, and adjuvant chemotherapy were significantly related to RFS and OS. Adjuvant radiotherapy was related to RFS only. Pelvic lymph node dissection was related to OS only. Neither surgical approach nor radicality of hysterectomy were related to RFS or OS. In multivariate analysis, histology and adjuvant chemotherapy were related to OS, and adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy were related to RFS (Table 2). Compared to endometrioid histology, non-endometrioid histology showed relatively low RFS and OS. Ovarian preservation or removal was not related to RFS or OS.

Table 1 Patient baseline characteristics
Fig. 2
figure2

Overall survival and recurrence free survival

Table 2 Univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors

Discussion

There is no clear consensus on the surgery scale in early stage endometrial cancer patients. Traditionally, total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and lymph node dissection and omentectomy for staging have been performed. According to the NCCN; American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO); and European Society for Medical Oncology, European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, and European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO) guidelines [3, 17, 18], ovarian preservation can be considered in pre-menopausal early stage endometrial cancer patients. While oophorectomy removes any occult ovarian metastatic tumor and reduces the ovarian cancer risk, surgical menopausal problems can result.

Previous studies have shown that preserving the ovary does not affect survival in patients with early stage endometrial cancer who are not menopausal, compared with those who have had the ovaries removed [4, 5, 14, 15]. Previous studies are compared in Table 3. These retrospective studies were conducted in the United States, China, and Korea, conducted mainly with pre-menopausal women as patient groups. Prospective research has been difficult to perform as recruitment of early stage and premenopausal patients has been challenging. Their results showed that in the case of early stage and low FIGO grade, preservation of the ovary did not affect the prognosis of the patient. Recently, a systemic review summarized previous studies, with more than 10,000 cases, and revealed an increase in OS and no shortening of RFS. In the early stages of premenopausal women, ovarian preservation may be a viable treatment option [19]. The results are similar to ours. However, as previously noted, this research has several limitations, including a large portion of patients with benign disease, the inclusion of patients with adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy after preserving the ovaries [5, 16], or including patients with old records [4]. There are many reports of ovarian function deterioration after radiation or chemotherapy in pre-menopausal women [20,21,22,23]. These cases demonstrate that preserving the ovaries does not result in maintaining ovarian function, since adjuvant treatment can also induce menopause.

Table 3 Previous studies about ovarian preservation in endometrial cancer patients

Endometrial cancer in premenopausal women has been shown to be hormone related, have early stage, no myometrial invasion, and good prognosis [24]. If metastatic or synchronous malignancy has not been found in the ovary during surgery, ovarian preservation may be performed; therefore, surgical menopause of the patient is not induced, which may be more beneficial to women’s health. We recommend to consider the pathology of the tumor and the necessity of maintaining fertility before surgery.

Although this retrospective study has some limitations, this is the first study in which all patients had been diagnosed with endometrial cancer through preoperative endometrial biopsy, and had ovarian preservation or removal planned in advance of surgery, after confirming no other distant metastasis through computed tomography scan and lab test. Further, a relatively low ratio of patients was administered adjuvant treatment, so this study may serve as a reliable reference for early FIGO stage endometrial cancer. However, this study has limited data about the side effects of each group, especially menopausal problems that occur in the ovarian removal group. Long-term follow-up of adverse effects in postoperative patients may reveal significant differences in patients who have undergone surgical menopause. Second, although a small number of patients received adjuvant treatment after surgery, that treatment was related to survival; consequently, a more accurate group selection process is warranted for future studies.

Cancer survival and life expectancy after diagnosis are increasing, and quality of life issues are becoming more important. It is time forFurther prospective research to confirm whether it is more favorable to remove the ovaries to decrease risk of recurrence or to maintain patient quality of life through ovarian preservation.

Conclusions

Ovarian preserving surgery in early stage endometrial cancer is a beneficial option for premenopausal patients and is not related to disease recurrence or overall survival rate. More precise stratification analysis is needed to determine which additional groups may safely preserve the ovary.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analysedanalyzed during this study are included in this published article.

Abbreviations

ASCO:

American Society of Clinical Oncology

ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO:

European Society for Medical Oncology, European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, and European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology

FIGO:

International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology

HRs:

Hazard ratios

IRB:

Institutional review board of our institution

NCCN:

National Comprehensive Cancer Network

RFS:

Recurrence free survival

OS:

Overall survival

References

  1. 1.

    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:7–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Lim MC, Won YJ, Ko MJ, Kim M, Shim SH, Suh DH, et al. Incidence of cervical, endometrial, and ovarian cancer in Korea during 1999-2015. J Gynecol Oncol. 2019;30:e38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Colombo N, Creutzberg N, Amant F, Bosse T, González-Martín A, Ledermann J, Marth C, Nout R, Querleu D, Mirza MR, Sessa C, ESMO-ESGOESTRO Endometrial Consensus Conference Working Group. ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO Consensus Conference on Endometrial Cancer: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(1):16–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv484.

  4. 4.

    Wright JD, Buck AM, Shah M, Burke WM, Schiff PB, Herzog TJ. Safety of ovarian preservation in premenopausal women with endometrial cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1214–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Wright JD, Jorge S, Tergas AI, Hou JY, Burke WM, Huang Y, et al. Utilization and outcomes of ovarian conservation in premenopausal women with endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127:101–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Lee TS, Jung JY, Kim JW, Park NH, Song YS, Kang SB, et al. Feasibility of ovarian preservation in patients with early stage endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;104:52–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Muka T, Oliver-Williams C, Kunutsor S, Laven JS, Fauser BC, Chowdhury R, et al. Association of age at onset of menopause and time since onset of menopause with cardiovascular outcomes, intermediate vascular traits, and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1:767–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Svejme O, Ahlborg HG, Nilsson JA, Karlsson MK. Early menopause and risk of osteoporosis, fracture and mortality: a 34-year prospective observational study in 390 women. BJOG. 2012;119:810–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Bove R, Secor E, Chibnik LB, Barnes LL, Schneider JA, Bennett DA, et al. Age at surgical menopause influences cognitive decline and Alzheimer pathology in older women. Neurology. 2014;82:222–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Doganay M, Kokanali D, Kokanali MK, Cavkaytar S, Aksakal OS. Comparison of female sexual function in women who underwent abdominal or vaginal hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019;48:29–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Secosan C, Balint O, Pirtea L, Grigoras D, Balulescu L, Ilina R. Surgically induced menopause-a practical review of literature. Medicina (Kaunas). 2019;55(8):482. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55080482.

  12. 12.

    Edey KA, Rundle S, Hickey M. Hormone replacement therapy for women previously treated for endometrial cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;5:CD008830.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Sullivan SD, Sarrel PM, Nelson LM. Hormone replacement therapy in young women with primary ovarian insufficiency and early menopause. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:1588–99.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Sun C, Chen G, Yang Z, Jiang J, Yang X, Li N, et al. Safety of ovarian preservation in young patients with early-stage endometrial cancer: a retrospective study and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:782–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Lee TS, Kim JW, Kim TJ, Cho CH, Ryu SY, Ryu HS, et al. Ovarian preservation during the surgical treatment of early stage endometrial cancer: a nation-wide study conducted by the Korean gynecologic oncology group. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;115:26–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Lee TS, Lee JY, Kim JW, Oh S, Seong SJ, Lee JM, et al. Outcomes of ovarian preservation in a cohort of premenopausal women with early-stage endometrial cancer: a Korean gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;131:289–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Koh WJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Bean S, Bradley K, Campos SM, Cho KR, et al. Uterine neoplasms, version 1.2018, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2018;16:170–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Oktay K, Harvey BE, Partridge AH, Quinn GP, Reinecke J, Taylor HS, et al. Fertility preservation in patients with cancer: ASCO clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:1994–2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Jia P, Zhang Y. Ovarian preservation improves overall survival in young patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. Oncotarget. 2017;8:59940–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Rosendahl M, Andersen CY, la Cour FN, Juul A, Lossl K, Andersen AN. Dynamics and mechanisms of chemotherapy-induced ovarian follicular depletion in women of fertile age. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:156–66.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Chemaitilly W, Li Z, Krasin MJ, Brooke RJ, Wilson CL, Green DM, et al. Premature ovarian insufficiency in childhood cancer survivors: a report from the St. Jude lifetime cohort. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102(7):2242–50. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2016-3723.

  22. 22.

    Levine JM, Whitton JA, Ginsberg JP, Green DM, Leisenring WM, Stovall M, et al. Nonsurgical premature menopause and reproductive implications in survivors of childhood cancer: a report from the childhood cancer survivor study. Cancer. 2018;124:1044–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    van Dorp W, Haupt R, Anderson RA, Mulder RL, van den Heuvel-Eibrink MM, van Dulmen-den Broeder E, et al. Reproductive function and outcomes in female survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer: a review. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:2169–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Carneiro MM, Lamaita RM, Ferreira MC, Silva-Filho AL. Fertility-preservation in endometrial cancer: is it safe? Review of the literature. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2016;20:232–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Conceptualization: Wonkyo Shin, Sangsoo Seo. Data analysis: Wonkyo Shin. Manuscript draft: Wonkyo Shin. Manuscript revision and review: Myongcheol Lim, Sangyoon Park, Sokbom Kang. Supervision: Sangsoo Seo. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sang-Soo Seo.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board of our institution (IRB No. NCC2019–0272).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shin, W., Park, S., Kang, S. et al. The survival effect of ovary preservation in early stage endometrial cancer: a single institution retrospective analysis. J Ovarian Res 13, 97 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-020-00698-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Endometrial cancer
  • Early stage
  • Ovary preservation
  • Menopause