Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical carcinoma: which is better, intravenous or intra-arterial?

Abstract

PurposeThe aim of our study is to investigate the differences in therapeutic effects and clinical significance between intravenous systematic chemotherapy and intra-arterial interventional chemotherapy in stage Ib2–IIb cervical carcinomas.MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed on 93 cases of intravenous and 118 cases of intra-arterial neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage Ib2–IIb cervical carcinomas treated in Peking Union Medical College Hospital from the year 2001 to 2010.ResultsAfter neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the overall response rate was 84.9% versus (vs) 88.2% and the operability rate was 77.4% vs 81.4%, for intravenous vs intra-arterial (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in toxicities, surgical duration, perioperative blood loss, and operative complications between these two groups. Postoperative pathological examination revealed a significantly lower parametrial infiltration in the intra-arterial group (12.5% vs 38.1%, P<0.05), while the positive vaginal margin, lymph node metastasis, and intravascular tumor embolus showed no significant differences. The intravenous group and the intra-arterial group had similar recurrence rate (16.0% vs 12.3%), distant metastasis rate (9.1% vs 8.5%), and 5 year survival rate (79.5% vs 84.9%), without significant differences.ConclusionNeoadjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil are safe and effective for patients with locally advanced cervical carcinomas. The intravenous and the intra-arterial approaches present with similar chemotherapy efficacy and clinical outcome. Since it is more simple and economical, the intravenous systematic approach shows greater value in clinical application.