Article Text

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Multi-institutional study on the role of post-operative radiotherapy in elderly patients with endometrial cancer
  1. Guler Yavas1,
  2. Ozan Cem Guler2,
  3. Melis Gultekin3,
  4. Ezgi Oymak4,
  5. Sezin Yuce Sari3,
  6. Ferah Yildiz3 and
  7. Cem Onal1,2
  1. 1Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
  2. 2Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine, Adana Dr. Turgut Noyan Research and Treatment Center, Adana, Turkey
  3. 3Department of Radiation Oncology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
  4. 4Division of Radiation Oncology, Iskenderun Gelisim Hospital, Hatay, Turkey
  1. Correspondence to Dr Cem Onal, Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara 01120, Turkey; hcemonal{at}


Objective To investigate the prognostic factors for survival and toxicities in elderly (≥65 years) patients with endometrial cancer who underwent post-operative radiotherapy. Additionally, to compare the treatment outcomes between the older elderly (≥75 years) and younger elderly (65–74 years) patients.

Methods Medical records of patients with enometrial cancer treated between January 1998 and July 2019 were reviewed. Patients with stage IA to IIIC2, all histology subtypes, and any grade were included. All patients underwent total abdominal hysterectomy and received adjuvant radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. All but 67 (8.4%) of 801 patients had lymph node dissection. Clinicopathological factors and treatment strategies were compared between the two age groups. The prognostic factors for overall survival and progression-free survival were investigated.

Results A total of 801 patients with enometrial cancer, 627 patients (78.3%) younger elderly and 174 patients (21.7%) in the older elderly group were included. Median follow-up was 74.3 months (range 0.4–224.6). The older elderly patients had significantly higher rates of grade 3 tumors (51.7% vs 40.8%; p=0.04), cervical glandular involvement (21.8% vs 14.0%; p=0.03), and cervical stromal invasion (34.5% vs 27.9%; p=0.04) than the younger elderly patients. The rates of lymph node dissection (p=0.2), radiotherapy modalities (p=0.92), and systemic chemotherapy (p=0.2) did not differ between the two groups. The 5-year locoregional control and distant metastasis rates were 88.3% and 23.8%, respectively. The 5-year cause-specific survival and progression-free survival rates for younger and older elderly patients, were 79.8% vs 74.3% (p=0.04) and 67.5% vs 57.8% (p<0.001), respectively. In multivariate analysis, larger tumor size, non-endometrioid histology, cervical stromal involvement, and stage III disease were associated with poor cause-specific survival and progression-free survival. Age was an independent predictor of worse progression-free survival, but not of cause-specific survival. There was no significant difference in acute and late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities between age groups.

Conclusions Post-operative radiotherapy for elderly patients with endometrial cancer is effective and well tolerated. Advanced age should not preclude appropriate treatment, especially in those with adequate quality of life, life expectancy, and functional status.

  • radiotherapy
  • endometrium

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

View Full Text


  • Contributors GY and CO established the study design, participated in data analysis, and revised, wrote the manuscript, and approved the final manuscript. OCG, EO, SYS participated in data acquisition and analysis, MG, FY, CO performed data and statistical analyses, and approved the final manuscript. CO is the guarantor of this study.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.