These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Stage I, grade III adenocarcinoma of the endometrium treated with surgery and irradiation. Sites of failure and correlation of failure rate with irradiation technique.
    Author: Bedwinek J, Galakatos A, Camel M, Kao MS, Stokes S, Perez C.
    Journal: Cancer; 1984 Jul 01; 54(1):40-7. PubMed ID: 6722744.
    Abstract:
    Eighty-three patients treated with total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (TAH-BSO) and adjuvant irradiation for Stage I, grade III adenocarcinoma of the endometrium were reviewed. At 5 years, the overall survival was 71%, and the disease-free survival (excluding patients dying of intercurrent disease) was 79%. The failure rates for pelvis alone, pelvis plus distant, and distant alone were 4.8%, 4.8%, and 10.8%, respectively. The most common site of failure was the upper abdomen; 12% of all patients had a failure at this site, either alone or in conjunction with failure at another site. The 24% rate of failure in 50 patients receiving a preoperative implant and external irradiation was not significantly different from the 15% failure rate in 33 patients whose adjuvant irradiation consisted of a preoperative implant only. For the patients who had both an implant and external irradiation, the dose of external irradiation had no correlation with the rate of failure. In contrast, the number of milligram-hours delivered to the uterus by the preoperative implant had a strong inverse correlation with the rate of failure, both for patients receiving an implant only and for those receiving an implant plus external irradiation. The data suggest the following: (1) a high-intensity preoperative uterine implant may be an important adjunct to surgery; and (2) external pelvic irradiation in addition to the implant does not seem to be any more beneficial than an implant alone.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]