The prognostic role of FIGO stage in patients with vulvar cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objective: To perform a meta-analysis examining the survival of patients with vulvar cancer based on the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system. Methods: Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane databases were searched until 20 March 2015 for prospective or retrospective studies using the terms vulvar cancer, prognostic/prognosis, survival, recurrence, lymph nodes (LNs), inguinal lymphadenectomy/excision, and staging. The primary outcome was 5 year overall survival (OS), and secondary outcomes were 5 year disease-free survival (DFS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Fourteen retrospective studies were included. The 5 year OS rate decreased with increasing 2009 FIGO stage and number of LN metastasis. FIGO stage I, II, III, and IV patients had 5 year OS rates of 84.0%, 74.6%, 47.8%, and 9.4%, respectively. Pooled estimates showed that the 5 year OS was 84.5% for patients without LN metastasis, and for patients with ≥3 LN metastases the 5 year OS rate was 30.1%. Similarly, the overall 5 year DFS and PFS decreased with the increasing number of LN metastases. The 5 year DFS rate was 87.2% for patients with no LN metastasis and for patients with ≥3 LN metastases was 35.4%. The 5 year PFS rate was 86.6% for patients with no LN metastasis and for patients with ≥3 LN metastases was 27.6%. Limitations: All studies were retrospective studies. DFS and PFS rates in patients with different 2009 FIGO stages and with different mean tumor sizes were not examined due to a limited number of reports. Conclusions: More advanced 2009 FIGO stage and greater number of LN metastases are associated with worse outcomes in patients with vulvar cancer.

Keywords:

• FIGO stage
• Lymph node
• Meta-analysis
• Metastasis
• Vulvar cancer

Transparency

Declaration of funding

This study was not funded.

Declaration of financial/other relationships

J.Z. and G.S. have disclosed that they have no significant relationships with or financial interests in any commercial companies related to this study or article.

CMRO peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.