Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 23, 2025
Development of Compendium for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Published on: April 12, 2024
Prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology in endometrial carcinoma based on ESGO/ESTRO/ESP risk
Yue Zhang1, Ran Chu1, Zhaoyang Zhang1
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China; Division of Gynecology oncology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China.
Objective:
This study aimed to determine the prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology (PC) on endometrial carcinoma (EC) patients under the ESGO/ESTRO/ESP risk classification.
Methods:
This study retrospectively analyzed EC patients from 27 medical centers in China from 2000 to 2019. Patients were divided into three ESGO risk groups: low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-intermediate risk, and high-risk groups. The covariates were balanced by using the propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (PS-IPTW). The prognostic significance of PC was assessed by Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox regression analysis.
Results:
A total of 6313 EC patients with PC results were included and positive PC was reported in 384 women (6.1%). The multivariate Cox analysis in all patients showed the positive PC was significantly associated with decreased PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.55-3.13, P < 0.001) and OS (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.49-3.40, P < 0.001),and the Kaplan-Meier curves also showed a poor survival in the intermediate and high-intermediate risk group (5-year PFS: 75.5% vs. 93.0%, P < 0.001; 5-year OS: 78.3% vs. 96.4%, P < 0.001); While in the low-risk group, there were no significant differences in PFS and OS between different PC status (5-year PFS: 93.1% vs. 97.3%, P = 0.124; 5-year OS: 98.6% vs. 98.2%, P = 0.823); in the high-risk group, significant difference was only found in PFS (5-year PFS: 62.5% vs. 77.9%, P = 0.033).
Conclusion:
Positive PC was an adverse prognostic factor for EC, especially in the intermediate and high-intermediate risk patients. Gynecologic oncologists should reconsider the effect of positive PC on different ESGO risk groups.
