title: [Significance of prognostic evaluation of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 staging system on stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To explore the impact of 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system alteration for stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma on its' prognosis assessing.
  
  
  METHODS
  A retrospective study was carried out on 244 cases with endometrial carcinoma admitted in Peking University People's Hospital from Jan.1995 to Feb.2008.
  
  
  RESULTS
  (1) All 244 patients were divided into FIGO 2009 Ia group (n = 200) and FIGO 2009 Ib group (n = 44) according to FIGO 2009 staging system, while they were divided into FIGO 1988 Ia group (n = 34), FIGO 1988 Ib group (n = 156) and FIGO 1988 Ic group (n = 29). The others 25 cases were stage IIa (n = 16) and stage IIIa with merely positive abdominal cytology (n = 9) according to FIGO 1988 staging system.(2) The higher percentage of low-grade in FIGO 1988 Ia group than that in FIGO 2009 Ia group (P = 0.003). Compared with FIGO 2009 Ia group, the age of the patients, surgery extent, the percentage of lymph node excision and received chemotherapy and radiotherapy, there were no difference in FIGO 1988 Ia and Ib group, respectively (P > 0.05). There were 5.9% (2/34) and 6.7% (10/150) found relapse among FIGO 1988 Ia group and FIGO 1988 Ib group, and there were 2.9% (1/34) and 2.7% (4/150) for the two groups died of carcinoma. Compared with FIGO 2009 Ia group, there were not significant difference [7.5% (13/200) vs. 3.0% (6/200); P > 0.05]. The 5 years and 10 years progression-free survival (PFS) of FIGO 1988 Ia group and Ib group were (97.0 ± 3.0)%, (90.9 ± 6.5)% and (95.3 ± 2.1)%, (90.2 ± 3.6)%, respectively, in which there were not significant difference compared with that in FIGO 2009 Ia group [(96.1 ± 1.6)%, (89.6 ± 3.2)%; P > 0.05]. The 5 years and 10 years overall survival (OS) in FIGO 1988 Ia group and Ib group were 100%, (93.8 ± 6.0)% and (96.9 ± 1.8)%, (95.2 ± 2.5)%, respectively, in which there were did not significant difference with that in FIGO 2009 Ia group [(97.9 ± 1.2)%, (93.4 ± 2.8)%; P > 0.05].(3) There were not significant difference between FIGO 1988 Ic group and FIGO 2009 Ib group (P > 0.05) for the age of the patients, grade, surgery extent, lymph node excision, the percentage of received chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Between FIGO 1988 Ic group and FIGO 2009 Ib group, there were 3.4% (1/29) and 6.8% (3/44) cases found relapse, respectively. And there were 0 and 2.3% (1/44) cases died of carcinoma in the two groups, in which there were not differ much either (P > 0.05). The 5 years and 10 years PFS in FIGO 1988 Ic group were all 100%, while they were 100% and (90.9 ± 6.2)% in FIGO 2009 Ib group. The 5 years and 10 years OS in FIGO 1988 Ic group were all 100%, but were 100% and (95.0 ± 4.9)% in FIGO 2009 Ib group, in which they all did not significantly differ much (P > 0.05). (4) The patients in FIGO 2009 Ia group were younger than those in FIGO 2009 Ib group (P < 0.01). The percentage of low grade in FIGO 2009 Ia group were higher than that in FIGO 2009 Ib group (P = 0.029). The percentages of received chemotherapy and radiotherapy in FIGO 2009 Ia group were lower than that in FIGO 2009 Ib group remarkably (P < 0.01). But there were not significant difference in the uterine excision extent and the percentage of lymph node excision between the two groups (P > 0.05). There were not significantly differ in the relapse rates and the death rates between the FIGO 2009 Ia group and FIGO 2009 Ib group (P > 0.05). There were also not significant difference in PFS and OS between the two groups (P > 0.05).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  There were not significant difference in the prognosis between FIGO 2009 stage Ia and FIGO 1988 stage Ia and Ib. There were also not significant difference in the prognosis between FIGO 2009 stage Ia and FIGO 2009 stage Ib, which may be due to received more chemotherapy and radiotherapy in FIGO 2009 stage Ib patients.
authors.affiliation: Department of Gynecology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
authors.forename: Zhi-qi
authors.initials: ZQ
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Yan
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Zhang
authors.forename: Jian-liu
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Dan-hua
authors.initials: DH
authors.lastname: Shen
authors.forename: Tian
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Mu
authors.forename: Xin
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Zhao
authors.forename: Yuan-yang
authors.initials: YY
authors.lastname: Yao
authors.forename: Yun
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Bai
authors.forename: Li-hui
authors.initials: LH
authors.lastname: Wei
mesh_terms: D000367:Age Factors; D018269:Carcinoma, Endometrioid / Q000145:classification / Q000401:mortality / Q000473:pathology* / Q000628:therapy; D018572:Disease-Free Survival; D016889:Endometrial Neoplasms / Q000145:classification / Q000401:mortality / Q000473:pathology* / Q000628:therapy; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007044:Hysterectomy; D008197:Lymph Node Excision; D008207:Lymphatic Metastasis; D009215:Myometrium / Q000473:pathology*; D009361:Neoplasm Invasiveness; D009367:Neoplasm Staging / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D011379:Prognosis; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D015996:Survival Rate