Quality of life and survival in patients with uterine carcinosarcoma: A tertiary center observational study
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 26, 2026
An Orthotopic Endometrial Cancer Model with Retroperitoneal Lymphadenopathy Made From In Vivo Propagated and Cultured VX2 Cells
Published on: September 12, 2019
Eveline N B Pham1, Caroline B van den Berg1, Ingrid Boere2
1Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Objective:
This study aimed to assess the QoL in patients with uterine carcinosarcoma (UCS) and identify factors influencing survival.
Methods:
A prospective cohort study was conducted of patients with UCS who were treated between 2016 and 2022 in a Dutch academic hospital. QoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-EN24 questionnaires at baseline, end of treatment, and at one, two, and five years after treatment. Outcomes were described as mean scores in functioning and symptom domains. The mean scores of the QLQ-C30 were compared to those of a matched group from the general Dutch population. Clinical data were collected. Factors influencing survival were assessed via Cox proportional hazards models.
Results:
The study included 64 patients, 56 of them participated in the QoL questionnaires. The median progression-free survival was 13 months, and overall survival was 20 months. QoL was significantly lower in all functional domains at one year after treatment compared to members of the general population. The most affected functioning domains were physical, role, cognitive, and social functioning and symptoms like fatigue, pain, and lymphedema. Long-term QoL remained compromised, with global health and insomnia notably impaired even five years after treatment. Significant prognostic factors for better overall survival included lower FIGO stage, surgery, and chemotherapy.
Conclusions:
Patients with UCS experience significant deterioration in QoL. Despite extensive treatment, QoL remains poor, emphasizing the need for integrating QoL considerations into treatment decisions to balance the benefits of treatment with potential QoL impairments.
