FIGO 2018 Versus Ontogenetic Staging for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: An International Multicenter Cohort Study
Bruno Rezende1, Benjamin Wolf2,3, Vinicius Colman4
1Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Londrina Cancer Hospital, Lucilla Ballalai, 212-Jardim Petrópolis, Londrina 86015-520, Brazil.
Background/Objective:
The aim of this study was to compare two different staging systems (FIGO 2018 and ontogenetic staging) for cervical cancer in a locally advanced setting and to determine which one provides better prognostic stratification and a stronger association with oncological outcomes.
Methods:
A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients with cervical cancer (FIGO 2018 stages IIB-IVA) primarily treated with chemoradiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the difference in accuracy for predicting cancer-specific survival at 3 years between the ontogenetic tumor staging system and the FIGO 2018 staging system. Secondary endpoints assessed the same difference in prognostic power with respect to recurrence-free survival and overall survival.
Results:
Of 341 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer, the ontogenetic tumor staging system demonstrated superior prognostic performance compared to the FIGO 2018 system. The ontogenetic system showed clear separation of Kaplan-Meier curves for recurrence-free, overall, and cancer-specific survival, unlike the overlapping FIGO 2018 survival curves. Multivariable Cox models controlling clinicopathological factors revealed a progressive, significant worsening of cancer-specific survival across ontogenetic tumor (oT) stages, which was not observed with FIGO staging. Formal comparisons using Harrell's C-index, time-dependent areas under the curve (AUC), and Akaike's information criterion confirmed the ontogenetic model's significantly better discriminative ability and fit. Furthermore, ontogenetic staging provided significant risk stratification within the FIGO IIIC nodal-positive group and among patients with parametrial invasion, demonstrating its refined prognostic utility.
Conclusions:
Ontogenetic tumor staging can be effectively applied using imaging alone and was superior to the FIGO 2018 classification in this study.
More Related Videos
06:46Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
09:08Integration of Bioinformatics Approaches and Experimental Validations to Understand the Role of Notch Signaling in Ovarian Cancer
Published on: January 12, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Tumor Progression
Colon cancer is one of the best-documented examples of tumor progression. Early mutation in the APC gene in colon cells causes a small growth on the colon wall called a polyp. With time, this polyp grows into a benign, pre-cancerous tumor. Further...
Cancer Survival Analysis
