Levent AKMAN, NURİ YILDIRIM, Mustafa Coşan TEREK, Zeynep ÖZSARAN, Senem ALANYALI, Ayfer HAYDAROĞLU, Ulus ŞANLI, Erdem GÖKER, Osman ZEKİOĞLU, Necmettin ÖZDEMİR, Ahmet Aydın ÖZSARAN

Korpus uteri kanserlerinin epidemiyoloji ve sağ kalım özellikleri

Amaç: Ege Üniversitesi Hastanesinde 1992-2017 arası kanser tanı ve tedavisi yapılan 3379 korpus uteri kanserinin epidemiyolojik ve sağ kalım özelliklerini analiz etmek ve sonuçları literatürle karşılaştırmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Ege Üniversitesi Kanserle Savaş Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi tarafından toplanan korpus uteri kanseri verileri CANREG özel bilgisayar programına kayıt edilmiş, DSÖ ve SEER sistemleri temelinde gruplanarak analizler yapılmıştır. İstatistik analizlerde Ki-kare, General Linear Model, Kaplan Meier sağ kalım analizleri uygulanmıştır. Kaplan Meier Sağ kalım analizinde Log Rank (Mantel-Cox), Breslow (Generalized Wilcoxon) ve Tarone-Ware istatistikleri kullanılmıştır. İstatistik analizlerde p

Epidemiologic fetaures and survival outcomes of carcinoma of the corpus uteri

Aim: To evaluate epidemiologic features and survival outcomes of 3379 patients treated with the diagnosis of carcinoma of the corpus uteri (CC) in Ege University Hospital (EUH) between 1992-2017 and compare them with the literature. Materials and Methods: Data recorded to CANREG-4 program in EUH between 1992-2017 by EU Fight Against Cancer Research and Application Center (EUKAM) were grouped according to WHO and SEER systems. For statistical analysis, Chi-square method and general linear modeling and Kaplan-Meier analysis were performed. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, Log Rank (Mantel-Cox), Breslow (Generalized Wilcxon) and Tarone-Ware methods were used. p

PDF

___

1. https://hsgm.saglik.gov.tr/depo/birimler/kanser-db/istatistik/2014-RAPOR._uzuuun.pdf.

2. Cancer report 2010. Ed Tuncer Am, Moore M, Qiazo YL, Yoo KY, Tijama K, Özgül N, Gültekin M. Asian pacific organization for cancer prevention (APOCP) İstanbul 2010.

3. Jemal A, S,egel R, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin 2008; 58: 71-96.

4. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015; 65: 87.

5. Galaal K, Donkers H, Bryant A, Lopes AD. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for themanagement of early stage endometrial cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2018, Issue 10. Art. No.: CD006655. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006655.

6. Amant F, Moerman P, Timmerman D, Limbergen EV, Vergote I. Endometrial cancer. Lancet 2005; 366: 491-505.

7. Noone AM, Howlader N, Krapcho M, Miller D, Brest A, Yu M, Ruhl J, Tatalovich Z, Mariotto A, Lewis DR, Chen HS, Feuer EJ, Cronin KA (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2015, National Cancer Institute.

8. Alektiar KM, McKee A, Lin O. Is there a difference in outcome between stage I-II endometrial cancer of papillary serous/clear cell and endometrioid FIGO grade 3 cancer? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002; 54: 79–85.

9. Cirisano FD, Robboy SJ, Dodge RK. Epidemiopathologic and surgicopathologic findings of papillary serous and clear cell endometrial cancers when compared to endometrioid carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 1999; 74: 385–94.

10. Kosary CL. FIGO stage, histology, histologic grade, age and race as prognostic factors in determining survival for cancers of the female gynecological system: an analysis of 1973–1987 SEER cases of cancers of the endometrium, cervix, ovary, vulva, and vagina. Semin Surg Oncol. 1994; 10: 31–46.

11. Tejerizo-García A, Jiménez-López JS, Muñoz-González JL, Bartolomé-Sotillos S, Marqueta-Marqués L, López-González G, Gómez JF. Overall survival and disease-free survival in endometrial cancer: prognostic factors in 276 patients. Onco Targets Ther. 2013; 9: 1305-13.