Nomogram for Predicting Survival in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer with Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy plus or Not Adjuvant Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Analysis Based on 2018 FIGO Staging
Li Hua,Mengzhuan Wei,Chengjun Feng,Shiting Li,Xiaomin Wen,Shaojun Chen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/cbr.2023.0199
2024-06-03
Abstract:Background: The comprehensive treatment mode of combining concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) with adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) is a commonly used mainstream model in the clinical practice of locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). However, the necessity for AC after CCRT lacks sufficient evidence-based medical support. This study constructs a predictive model for the survival time dependence of CCRT ± AC for LACC based on the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging with internal validation, the prognosis was assessed with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and concurrent cisplatin, and provides guidance for future stratified treatment. Materials and Methods: The retrospective analysis included 482 patients with LACC who CCRT from January 2016 to January 2023. Patients who used the 2009 FIGO staging were all standardized for the 2018 FIGO staging. The 482 patients with LACC were divided into a training set (n = 290) and a validation set (n = 192) at a ratio of 6:4. COX multivariate regression model and LASSO regression were used to screen for independent prognostic factors affecting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and a nomogram clinical prediction model was constructed based on these factors. Evaluate the effectiveness of the model through the receiver operating characteristic curve, calibration curve, decision curve, risk heat map, and survival curves for risk stratification. Results: The PFS and OS independent prognostic risk factors affecting the 2018 FIGO staging of LACC during CCRT were validated to be similar to the 2009 FIGO staging prediction model reported in previous literature. In the training cohort, area under the curve (AUC) values at 1, 3, and 5 years were 0.941, 0.882, and 0.885 for PFS, and 0.946, 0.946, and 0.969 for OS, respectively. When applied to a test cohort, the model also showed accurate prediction result (AUC at 1, 3, and 5 years were 0.869, 0.891, and 0.899 for PFS, and 0.891, 0.941 and 0.878 for OS, respectively). Subgroup analysis suggests that patients with LACC, adenocarcinoma, stage IVA, pelvic lymph node metastasis, pretreatment hemoglobin ≤100 g/l and residual tumor diameter >2 cm, who received CCRT in the 2018 FIGO stage, may benefit more from adjuvant chemtherapy. Conclusions: Based on the 2018 FIGO staging, a nomogram prediction model for PFS and OS in patients with LACC undergoing CCRT was developed. The model, established by combining weighted clinical and pathological factors, can provide more personalized treatment predictions in clinical practice. For patients with high-risk factors such as residual tumor diameter > 2 cm after CCRT for LACC, AC may bring benefits.