May the alterable use of the FIGO 1988 Staging System and the FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer lead to significant clinical mistakes?

Introduction: Since 2009 the new FIGO Staging System of endometrial cancer, which changed the previous FIGO 1988 Staging System, has been present. Unfortunately, parallel use of both classifications is observed. Aim of study: to assess whether parallel use of the 2009 and the 1988 FIGO staging syste...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Przegla̜d menopauzalny 2011-09, Vol.15 (5), p.372
Hauptverfasser: Gottwald, Leszek, Moszynska-Zielinska, Malgorzata, Surkont, Grzegorz, Korczynski, Jerzy, Tylinski, Wieslaw, Szwalski, Jaroslaw, Spych, Michal
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; pol
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 5
container_start_page 372
container_title Przegla̜d menopauzalny
container_volume 15
creator Gottwald, Leszek
Moszynska-Zielinska, Malgorzata
Surkont, Grzegorz
Korczynski, Jerzy
Tylinski, Wieslaw
Szwalski, Jaroslaw
Spych, Michal
description Introduction: Since 2009 the new FIGO Staging System of endometrial cancer, which changed the previous FIGO 1988 Staging System, has been present. Unfortunately, parallel use of both classifications is observed. Aim of study: to assess whether parallel use of the 2009 and the 1988 FIGO staging systems can cause significant therapeutic mistakes in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. Material and methods: We analysed 262 patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. The endometrial cancers were staged in both classifications. We analysed possible therapeutic mistakes caused by diverse nomenclature. Results: The patients at low risk, intermediate risk, and high risk for relapse were presented in: 110 (41.6%), 109 (42.0%) and 43 (16.4%) cases, respectively. The possibility of inappropriate qualification for adjuvant treatment occurred in 102 patients (38.9%) if they were staged in the FIGO 1988 classification and interpreted as the FIGO 2009 classification, and similarly, in 65 patients (24.8%) if they were staged in the FIGO 2009 classification and interpreted as the FIGO 1988 classification. The risk of a decision mistake in terms of the adjuvant treatment due to diverse nomenclature was observed commonly in 167 patients (63.7%). Conclusions: The common use of both FIGO staging systems for endometrioid endometrial cancer can cause significant therapeutic mistakes in terms of the adjuvant treatment. There is a need to use only the new FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer and stop using the FIGO 1988 Staging System to avoid therapeutic mistakes.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1237635180</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2840179661</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_12376351803</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNi71OwzAUha0KpIafd7gScyT_lNSeGBAFBtSh3atLehNcHBt8naHvwQMTISQkpk7n6DvfmYlKa-dqKY09E5VqFqa2dtnMxQXzQcrGabWoxNcLHqG8EWAolPE1EIxMkLofuHp-XINy1sKmYO9jD5sjFxoA4_5P0FK6_0KXMlDcp4FK9higxdhShkA4HROw76Pv_EQLtMHHqQUYPBd8J767EucdBqbr37wUN6uH7f1T_ZHT50hcdoc05jhNO6XNsjG3ykpzmvUNLbBWPw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1237635180</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>May the alterable use of the FIGO 1988 Staging System and the FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer lead to significant clinical mistakes?</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Gottwald, Leszek ; Moszynska-Zielinska, Malgorzata ; Surkont, Grzegorz ; Korczynski, Jerzy ; Tylinski, Wieslaw ; Szwalski, Jaroslaw ; Spych, Michal</creator><creatorcontrib>Gottwald, Leszek ; Moszynska-Zielinska, Malgorzata ; Surkont, Grzegorz ; Korczynski, Jerzy ; Tylinski, Wieslaw ; Szwalski, Jaroslaw ; Spych, Michal</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction: Since 2009 the new FIGO Staging System of endometrial cancer, which changed the previous FIGO 1988 Staging System, has been present. Unfortunately, parallel use of both classifications is observed. Aim of study: to assess whether parallel use of the 2009 and the 1988 FIGO staging systems can cause significant therapeutic mistakes in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. Material and methods: We analysed 262 patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. The endometrial cancers were staged in both classifications. We analysed possible therapeutic mistakes caused by diverse nomenclature. Results: The patients at low risk, intermediate risk, and high risk for relapse were presented in: 110 (41.6%), 109 (42.0%) and 43 (16.4%) cases, respectively. The possibility of inappropriate qualification for adjuvant treatment occurred in 102 patients (38.9%) if they were staged in the FIGO 1988 classification and interpreted as the FIGO 2009 classification, and similarly, in 65 patients (24.8%) if they were staged in the FIGO 2009 classification and interpreted as the FIGO 1988 classification. The risk of a decision mistake in terms of the adjuvant treatment due to diverse nomenclature was observed commonly in 167 patients (63.7%). Conclusions: The common use of both FIGO staging systems for endometrioid endometrial cancer can cause significant therapeutic mistakes in terms of the adjuvant treatment. There is a need to use only the new FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer and stop using the FIGO 1988 Staging System to avoid therapeutic mistakes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1643-8876</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2299-0038</identifier><language>eng ; pol</language><publisher>Poznan: Termedia Publishing House</publisher><ispartof>Przegla̜d menopauzalny, 2011-09, Vol.15 (5), p.372</ispartof><rights>Copyright Termedia Publishing House 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gottwald, Leszek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moszynska-Zielinska, Malgorzata</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Surkont, Grzegorz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korczynski, Jerzy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tylinski, Wieslaw</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szwalski, Jaroslaw</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spych, Michal</creatorcontrib><title>May the alterable use of the FIGO 1988 Staging System and the FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer lead to significant clinical mistakes?</title><title>Przegla̜d menopauzalny</title><description>Introduction: Since 2009 the new FIGO Staging System of endometrial cancer, which changed the previous FIGO 1988 Staging System, has been present. Unfortunately, parallel use of both classifications is observed. Aim of study: to assess whether parallel use of the 2009 and the 1988 FIGO staging systems can cause significant therapeutic mistakes in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. Material and methods: We analysed 262 patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. The endometrial cancers were staged in both classifications. We analysed possible therapeutic mistakes caused by diverse nomenclature. Results: The patients at low risk, intermediate risk, and high risk for relapse were presented in: 110 (41.6%), 109 (42.0%) and 43 (16.4%) cases, respectively. The possibility of inappropriate qualification for adjuvant treatment occurred in 102 patients (38.9%) if they were staged in the FIGO 1988 classification and interpreted as the FIGO 2009 classification, and similarly, in 65 patients (24.8%) if they were staged in the FIGO 2009 classification and interpreted as the FIGO 1988 classification. The risk of a decision mistake in terms of the adjuvant treatment due to diverse nomenclature was observed commonly in 167 patients (63.7%). Conclusions: The common use of both FIGO staging systems for endometrioid endometrial cancer can cause significant therapeutic mistakes in terms of the adjuvant treatment. There is a need to use only the new FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer and stop using the FIGO 1988 Staging System to avoid therapeutic mistakes.</description><issn>1643-8876</issn><issn>2299-0038</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNqNi71OwzAUha0KpIafd7gScyT_lNSeGBAFBtSh3atLehNcHBt8naHvwQMTISQkpk7n6DvfmYlKa-dqKY09E5VqFqa2dtnMxQXzQcrGabWoxNcLHqG8EWAolPE1EIxMkLofuHp-XINy1sKmYO9jD5sjFxoA4_5P0FK6_0KXMlDcp4FK9higxdhShkA4HROw76Pv_EQLtMHHqQUYPBd8J767EucdBqbr37wUN6uH7f1T_ZHT50hcdoc05jhNO6XNsjG3ykpzmvUNLbBWPw</recordid><startdate>20110901</startdate><enddate>20110901</enddate><creator>Gottwald, Leszek</creator><creator>Moszynska-Zielinska, Malgorzata</creator><creator>Surkont, Grzegorz</creator><creator>Korczynski, Jerzy</creator><creator>Tylinski, Wieslaw</creator><creator>Szwalski, Jaroslaw</creator><creator>Spych, Michal</creator><general>Termedia Publishing House</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BYOGL</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110901</creationdate><title>May the alterable use of the FIGO 1988 Staging System and the FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer lead to significant clinical mistakes?</title><author>Gottwald, Leszek ; Moszynska-Zielinska, Malgorzata ; Surkont, Grzegorz ; Korczynski, Jerzy ; Tylinski, Wieslaw ; Szwalski, Jaroslaw ; Spych, Michal</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_12376351803</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng ; pol</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gottwald, Leszek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moszynska-Zielinska, Malgorzata</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Surkont, Grzegorz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korczynski, Jerzy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tylinski, Wieslaw</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szwalski, Jaroslaw</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spych, Michal</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>East Europe, Central Europe Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Przegla̜d menopauzalny</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gottwald, Leszek</au><au>Moszynska-Zielinska, Malgorzata</au><au>Surkont, Grzegorz</au><au>Korczynski, Jerzy</au><au>Tylinski, Wieslaw</au><au>Szwalski, Jaroslaw</au><au>Spych, Michal</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>May the alterable use of the FIGO 1988 Staging System and the FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer lead to significant clinical mistakes?</atitle><jtitle>Przegla̜d menopauzalny</jtitle><date>2011-09-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>372</spage><pages>372-</pages><issn>1643-8876</issn><eissn>2299-0038</eissn><abstract>Introduction: Since 2009 the new FIGO Staging System of endometrial cancer, which changed the previous FIGO 1988 Staging System, has been present. Unfortunately, parallel use of both classifications is observed. Aim of study: to assess whether parallel use of the 2009 and the 1988 FIGO staging systems can cause significant therapeutic mistakes in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. Material and methods: We analysed 262 patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. The endometrial cancers were staged in both classifications. We analysed possible therapeutic mistakes caused by diverse nomenclature. Results: The patients at low risk, intermediate risk, and high risk for relapse were presented in: 110 (41.6%), 109 (42.0%) and 43 (16.4%) cases, respectively. The possibility of inappropriate qualification for adjuvant treatment occurred in 102 patients (38.9%) if they were staged in the FIGO 1988 classification and interpreted as the FIGO 2009 classification, and similarly, in 65 patients (24.8%) if they were staged in the FIGO 2009 classification and interpreted as the FIGO 1988 classification. The risk of a decision mistake in terms of the adjuvant treatment due to diverse nomenclature was observed commonly in 167 patients (63.7%). Conclusions: The common use of both FIGO staging systems for endometrioid endometrial cancer can cause significant therapeutic mistakes in terms of the adjuvant treatment. There is a need to use only the new FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer and stop using the FIGO 1988 Staging System to avoid therapeutic mistakes.</abstract><cop>Poznan</cop><pub>Termedia Publishing House</pub><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1643-8876
ispartof Przegla̜d menopauzalny, 2011-09, Vol.15 (5), p.372
issn 1643-8876
2299-0038
language eng ; pol
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1237635180
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
title May the alterable use of the FIGO 1988 Staging System and the FIGO 2009 Staging System for endometrial cancer lead to significant clinical mistakes?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T01%3A19%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=May%20the%20alterable%20use%20of%20the%20FIGO%201988%20Staging%20System%20and%20the%20FIGO%202009%20Staging%20System%20for%20endometrial%20cancer%20lead%20to%20significant%20clinical%20mistakes?&rft.jtitle=Przegla%CC%9Cd%20menopauzalny&rft.au=Gottwald,%20Leszek&rft.date=2011-09-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=372&rft.pages=372-&rft.issn=1643-8876&rft.eissn=2299-0038&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2840179661%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1237635180&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true