Evaluation of Baseline Characteristics and Therapeutic Management Strategies in Metastatic Cervical Cancer in Germany: A Multicentric Retrospective Longitudinal Observational Study: A Quality Assurance Initiative of the AGO-Study Group and AGO-OK Uterus.

INTRODUCTION

Real-world data on treatment patterns and outcomes in recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer (r/mCC) are lacking.

METHODS

This first national quality assurance initiative was a retrospective analysis of patients with r/mCC diagnosed between 2018 and 2022, who were identified from medical records of 31 gynecologic cancer centers in Germany. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes were assessed descriptively. Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 503 eligible patients (median age 55 years) were analyzed for r/mCC. 276/503 patients (55%) received first-line (1L) chemotherapy (platinum combination: 247/276; 79%) followed by targeted antibody therapy with bevacizumab (177/247; 72%), immunotherapy (19/247; 8%), or both combined (50/247; 20%). 111/503 (22%) received chemotherapy only (platinum combination: 64/111; 58%, platinum mono: 35/111; 31%, or platinum-free: 12/111; 11%), and 110/503 (22%) did not receive any systemic treatment (the remaining 6/503 patients received immunotherapy only). For these subgroups after a median follow-up of 16 months, the PFS was 12 months (95% CI 11-14), 8.8 months (95% CI 7.1-11), and 3 months (95% CI 2.3-4.8), and OS was 25 months (95% CI 21-31), 17 months (95% CI 14-22), and 3.6 months (95% CI 2.8-5.3), respectively. 176/283 (62%) patients who developed progressive disease (PD) were treated with second-line (2L) therapy.

CONCLUSION

Only half of the patients with r/mCC were treated 1L with platinum-combination therapy including antibody therapy according to national guidelines. Moreover, 22% at initial diagnosis and 38% of patients at PD were not treated with systemic therapy at all. This might reflect poor general performance status, patients' preference, and/or lack of effective therapies especially in 2L treatment.