Advertisement
help button home button The Oncologist
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Oncologist, Vol. 11, No. 8, 902-912, September 2006; doi:10.1634/theoncologist.11-8-902
© 2006 AlphaMed Press

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow eLetters: Submit a response to this article
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Reprints/Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pectasides, D.
Right arrow Articles by Economopoulos, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pectasides, D.
Right arrow Articles by Economopoulos, T.

Gynecologic Oncology

Fallopian Tube Carcinoma: A Review

Dimitrios Pectasides, Eirini Pectasides, Theofanis Economopoulos

Second Department of Internal Medicine, Propaedeutic, Oncology Section, University of Athens, Attikon University Hospital, Haidari, Athens, Greece

Key Words. Primary fallopian tube carcinoma • Diagnosis • Staging • Prognosis • Treatment

Correspondence: D. Pectasides, M.D., Second Department of Internal Medicine, Propaedeutic, Oncology Section, Attikon University Hospital, Rimini 1, Haidari, Athens, Greece. Telephone: 210-5831691, 210-6008610; Fax: 210-5831690, 210-6008610; e-mail: pectasid{at}otenet.gr

Received March 11, 2006; accepted for publication June 22, 2006.


   ABSTRACT
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
Purpose. Primary fallopian tube carcinoma (PFTC) is a rare tumor that histologically and clinically resembles epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). The purpose of this study is to review the current available literature data on PFTC.

Patients and Results. Early clinical manifestation and prompt investigation often lead to diagnosis at an early stage of disease. However, the diagnosis of PFTC is rarely considered preoperatively and is usually first appreciated by the pathologist. Surgical staging/management and the use of chemotherapy follow the concepts used in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). In contrast to EOC is the importance of early lymphatic spread in this disease. The earlier diagnosis of PFTC leads to an apparent better survival compared with EOC. However, as with EOC, stage and residual tumor are the most important prognostic variables.

Conclusion. Until more extensive clinical research has been performed, ovarian carcinoma management principles should be used in clinical practice.


   INTRODUCTION
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
Primary fallopian tube carcinoma (PFTC) is an uncommon tumor accounting for approximately 0.14%–1.8% of female genital malignancies [1–7]. It is estimated, based on the data obtained from nine population-based cancer registries in the U.S., that the average annual incidence of PFTC is 3.6 per million women per year [8]. In England and Wales, 40 cases of PFTC and 4,500 cases of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) are registered annually [9]. Furthermore, data from an ovarian cancer screening study that followed up a cohort of 22,000 postmenopausal women revealed a higher than expected ratio of PFTC to EOC among these volunteers [10]. It is also possible that the true incidence of PFTC has been underestimated [9] because PFTC may have been mistakenly identified as ovarian tumors during initial surgery and/or during microscopic examination by a pathologist, as the histological appearance of these tumors are identical [11, 12]. A study from Finland reported that the incidence of PFTC is increasing, with an age-adjusted incidence of 1.2 per million for 1953–1957 to 5.4 per million for 1993–1997 [7]. About 1,200 cases of PFTC have been reported in the literature until now [13, 14].


   ETIOLOGY
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
The etiology of this cancer is unknown. Hormonal, reproductive, and possibly genetic factors thought to increase EOC risk might also increase PFTC risk. High parity has been reported to be protective [7], and a history of pregnancy and the use of oral contraceptives decreases the PFTC risk significantly [15]. It has been reported that there is no statistically significant correlation between PFTC and age, race, weight, education level, pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, previous hysterectomy, endometriosis, lactose intolerance, or smoking [11, 15, 16]. Meng et al. [17] found a fivefold higher bilateral occurrence in infertile patients than in fertile patients, and Hanton et al. [18] reported a better prognosis in nulliparous women.

PFTC has been described in high-risk breast–ovarian cancer families with germ-line BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 mutations [19–22]. Some studies suggested that the frequency and structure of the chromosomal changes (BRCA-1 or BRCA-2 mutations) observed in PFTC had similarities with those found in breast, serous ovarian, and uterine carcinomas, and consequently, a common molecular pathogenesis was claimed [22–26]. Some cases of occult PFTC have been detected at prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA-1 mutation carriers [27]. Therefore, the risk for this malignancy should be considered when prophylactic surgery is performed in such high-risk women [28]. In the case of prophylactic surgery, the uterus and the intrauterine portion of the fallopian tube should be removed.


   CLINICAL MANIFESTATIONS
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
PFTC most frequently occurs between the fourth and sixth decades of life [29, 30], with a median age of occurrence of 55 years (range, 17–88 years). However, PFTC has been reported in young girls aged 17–19 [31–34]. Patients with PFTC appear to have a shorter history of symptoms than those with EOC [35]. The clinical symptoms and signs of PFTC are shown in Table 1Go [11, 30, 36–41]. These symptoms are not specific. Latzko’s triad of symptoms, consisting of intermittent profuse serosanguinous vaginal discharge, colicky pain relieved by discharge, and abdominal or pelvic mass has been reported in 15% of cases [34]. Hydrops tubae profluens, a pathognomonic feature, implies intermittent discharge of clear or blood-tinged fluid spontaneously or on pressure followed by shrinkage of an adnexal mass and occurs in 5% of patients. PFTC is rarely asymptomatic, in contrast to EOC. In many cases, the preoperative diagnosis of PFTC is extremely rare [26, 29, 42, 43].


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Clinical features of primary fallopian tube carcinoma

 
The rate of preoperative diagnosis was in the range of 0%–10% [6, 44, 45]. Vaughan et al. [46] reported a rate of 21% of preoperative diagnosis, Baekelandt et al. [28] reported a rate of only 2%, and Meng et al. [17] reported that an intraoperative diagnosis is missed in up to 50% of patients. Some patients have been found to have extensive pelvic tumor, perhaps manifested by a tubo-ovarian mass. Even when such disease is resected, it is often impossible on histopathologic examination to determine the origin of the tumor. These cases are almost always classified as ovarian in origin because ovarian cancer is more common than PFTC [9]. When compared with EOC, PFTC is often diagnosed at an earlier stage because of abdominal pain secondary to tubal distention [47–50]. However, a diagnosis of PFTC may be suspected in cases of postmenopausal bleeding or spotting with negative diagnostic curettage. Pap smear positivity occurs in 10%–36% of cases [34]. The Pap smear shows abnormal, suspicious, or poorly differentiated cells or glands alternating with negative smear [34]. Also, psammoma bodies found in the Pap smear are suggestive of gynecologic malignancy, and more detailed examination is required [51].


   IMAGING
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
Imaging routinely carried out for suspected gynecologic malignancies includes ultrasound, computed tomography (CT) scan and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the abdomen. Of course, imaging techniques do not safely rule out the presence of malignancy or conversely rule in that possibility, and their findings cannot change the management of PFTC. Transvaginal and transabdominal ultrasound is an essential imaging technique in the diagnostic workup of patients with possible tubal pathology [52, 53]. Timor-Tritsch and Rottem [54] demonstrated the benefits of transvaginal over transabdominal ultrasound in the imaging of fallopian tubes. The echographic appearance of fallopian tubes is nonspecific, mimicking other pelvic diseases, such as tubo-ovarian abscess, ovarian tumor, and ectopic pregnancy. Echogram shows a cystic mass with spaces and mural nodules, a sausage-shaped mass, or a multilobular mass with a cog-and-wheel appearance [55–57]. Low-impedance vascular flow within the solid components has been reported [58]. In addition, it was demonstrated that transvaginal ultrasound examination with color Doppler can detect areas of neovascularization within the fallopian tube and thus may aid in the preoperative diagnosis of PFTC. Three-dimensional Doppler can show tubal wall irregularities such as papillary protrusions and pseudosepta and depictions of vascular abnormalities (arteriovenous shunts, microaneurysms, tumor lakes, blind ends, and dichotomous branching typical of malignant tumor vessels) [59].

The lesion can have the appearance of a small, solid, lobulated mass on CT scan or on MRI. On CT scan, the lesion has an attenuation equal to that of other soft tissue masses and enhances less than the myometrium. On T1-weighted MR images, the tumor is usually hypointense; on T2-weighted MR images the tumor is often homogeneously hyperintense. Imaging can most often detect solid and cystic components with papillary projections, which on MRI can be remarkably enhanced by the administration of gadolinium [60]. Associated findings include peritumoral ascites, intrauterine fluid collection, and hydrosalpinx [61]. MRI seems to be better than CT scan or ultrasound in detecting tumor infiltration of the bladder, vagina, pelvic sidewalls, pelvic fat, and rectum.


   CA-125 LEVEL
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
CA-125 is a useful tumor marker for the diagnosis, assessment of response to treatment, and detection of tumor recurrence during follow-up. The CA-125 antigen is often expressed by PFTC [62]. Although CA-125 per se is not diagnostic for PFTC, >80% of patients have elevated pre-treatment serum CA-125 levels [34, 49]. Elevated serum CA-125 levels have been detected more frequently in advanced or recurrent disease [10, 49, 62–64]. Gadducci et al. [48] reported that preoperative serum CA-125 levels were >35 U/ml in 85.3% of cases (68.7% for stage I–II and 94.7% for stage III–IV). The pretreatment serum CA-125 level is an independent prognostic factor of disease-free survival and overall survival (OS) in patients with PFTC [10, 34]. Serum CA-125 levels postsurgery have also been associated with response to chemotherapy [19, 64, 65]. CA-125 is also a useful marker for post-treatment follow-up. It is an early and sensitive marker for tumor progression during follow-up [63–66]. It has been reported that the lead time (elevated serum CA-125 levels prior to clinical or radiological diagnosis of recurrence) is 3 months (range, 0.5–7 months) [34].


   CYTOLOGY
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
Several authors state that the cervicovaginal smear is an inadequate diagnostic tool and no one would consider using it for the diagnosis of PFTC. Positive Pap smears have been reported in only 0%–23% of cases [6, 51, 67–70]. The discrepancy between an abnormal Pap smear and negative findings on colposcopy, cervical biopsy, and endometrial curettage should be considered suspicious for PFTC.


   PATHOLOGY
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
The diagnosis of PFTC is usually first made by a pathologist on histopathological examination. The most common histological types are shown in Table 2Go [50, 71–75]. Serous tumors are graded with respect to their differentiation and extent of solid components: most tumors are poorly differentiated [48, 50, 71] (Table 3Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Frequency of different histologic subtypes in primary fallopian tube carcinoma (PFTC) and epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC)

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3. Grading in primary fallopian tube carcinoma (PFTC) and epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC)

 
Because it is difficult to differentiate PFTC from EOC, patients with at least one of the following criteria should have the diagnosis of PFTC [72]: (a) The main tumor is in the tube and arises from the endosalpinx; (b) Histologically, the pattern reproduces the epithelium of the mucosa and often shows a papillary pattern; (c) If the wall is involved, the transition between benign and malignant epithelium should be demonstrable; and (d) The ovaries and endometrium are either normal or contain less tumor than the tube.

Molecular biology studies have shown that PFTC is characterized by an extremely unstable phenotype with highly scattered DNA ploidy patterns and frequent p53 gene alterations [75–79].


   PATTERN OF SPREAD AND STAGING
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
Tubal carcinoma spreads in much the same manner as EOC, principally by the transcelomic exfoliation of cells that implant throughout the peritoneal cavity. In approximately 80% of patients with advanced disease, metastases are confined to the peritoneal cavity [41]. Tumor spread can also occur by means of contiguous invasion, transluminal migration, and hematogenous dissemination [80]. Bilateral tubal involvement has been reported in 10%–27% of cases [10, 47, 48, 67, 71, 81]. Gadducci et al. [48] reported that both tubes were involved in 31.8% of 88 cases (23.8% of stage I–II cases and 39.1% of stage III–IV cases) and Schiller and Silverberg [81] reported bilateral involvement in 9.1% of 11 cases (5.3% of stage I–II cases and 30.4% of stage III–IV cases).

Penetration of the serosa is an ominous sign associated with a poor prognosis [44, 50, 80, 81]. In the latter stages of the disease, the natural course is more parallel to that of EOC.

Data from the literature indicate that patients with PFTC have a higher rate of retroperitoneal and distant metastases than those with EOC [12, 48–50, 70, 80, 82–84]. Metastases to the para-aortic lymph nodes have been documented in 33% of the patients with all stages of disease [85]. The PFTC is richly permeated with lymphatic channels that drain into the para-aortic lymph nodes through infundibulopelvic lymphatics. An intrapelvic course with drainage into the superior gluteal lymph nodes is also possible. The existence of anastomoses with lymphatics of the uterus in the round ligament may explain the development of inguinal node metastases [85]. Semrad et al. [2] reported that a large number of patients with an unknown nodal status at the initial staging who later developed recurrence probably had persistent disease in their lymphatics. On routine lymphadenectomy, 42%–59% of patients show lymph node metastases, with almost equal involvement of the para-aortic and pelvic lymph nodes [34]. Compared with EOC, nodal spread is more common in PFTC, and therefore these observations provide the basis for recommending lymph node sampling as a mandatory procedure of surgical staging [28, 48]. Surgical understaging, as in the case of EOC, was common in older series. Therefore, many of the stage I–II patients were probably understaged because of the lack of surgical retroperitoneal assessment.

The staging of PFTC is based on the surgical findings at laparotomy. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) EOC staging system has been adapted to apply to PFTC (Table 4Go) [19, 86, 87]. PFTC is often diagnosed at an earlier stage than EOC. In general, 20%–25% of patients have stage I, 20% have stage II, 45%–50% have stage III, and 5%–10% have stage IV [34].


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 4. Staging of primary fallopian tube carcinoma (PFTC)

 

   TREATMENT
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
Surgery
Surgery is the treatment of choice for PFTC. Surgical principles are the same as those used for ovarian cancer. The majority of patients in the literature had clearly suboptimal staging by today’s standards [46]. Aggressive cytoreductive surgery with removal of as much tumor as possible is warranted in patients with advanced disease. If it is impossible to achieve optimal debulking despite maximum effort, surgery should be attempted again after a few courses of chemotherapy. Very aggressive forms of surgery should only be considered in highly individualized patients [88]. Considering the strong tendency for lymphatic spread of the tumor, a systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy is preferred to lymph node sampling [48, 89, 90]. Klein et al. [89] reported that the median survival times were 43 and 21 months, respectively, in patients with and without lymph node dissection. In advanced disease, the bulk of extra-tubal disease and postoperative residual disease >2 cm are adverse prognostic factors [13, 46]. In young patients who want to retain fertility, limited surgery can be considered for patients with an in situ carcinoma and in those women with stage I and grade I carcinoma [34].

Second-Look Laparotomy
As in the case of EOC, second-look laparotomy does not have a role in the management of PFTC [91]. In EOC, second-look laparotomy has not been proven to be beneficial since 50% of patients with a surgical complete response still go on to relapse. In addition, there is no curative second-line therapy for those patients with positive findings at second-look laparotomy. A review of 310 patients included in 13 literature series revealed that 32 (62.7%) of the 51 patients submitted to second-look operation were found to be in pathologic complete remission (pCR) [92]. Recurrence was recorded for 22% of these 32 patients. A negative second-look laparotomy is associated with longer survival. Second-look laparotomy should currently be reserved for patients enrolled in clinical trials.

Radiotherapy
Radiotherapy could possibly be considered either as adjuvant therapy for early-stage patients [2, 5, 28, 45, 46, 73, 85, 93–96], for stage III residual negative patients, or in the relapse setting. Although radiotherapy has been used traditionally in the past as an adjuvant therapy for PFTC, its role in the era of effective chemotherapy is less well defined and controversial. In view of its low efficacy and high rate of serious complications, the use of postoperative radiotherapy in the treatment of patients with PFTC is no longer recommended. Intraperitoneal instillation of radioisotopes did not seem to reduce the recurrence risk in early-stage disease [12, 47].


   ADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
Based on the propensity for microscopic distant spread and the relatively high risk for recurrence despite complete surgical resection, chemotherapy seems to have a strong rationale as adjuvant treatment for patients with early-stage disease; however, very few data for this malignancy are currently available in the literature [6, 12, 47, 50, 67, 70, 97]. Single-agent chemotherapy does not seem to be effective, while platinum-based combination chemotherapy is the most commonly used adjuvant therapy for these patients, identical to EOC patients [41, 44, 68, 98]. Patients with stage IA and IB may not require adjuvant therapy, as for patients with EOC. All other patients are treated with platinum-based combinations. In addition, early-stage patients with tumors infiltrating the serosa or with pre- or intra-operatively ruptured tumors should receive chemotherapy. Peters et al. [50] reported no statistically significant difference in survival with the addition of single-agent chemotherapy in patients with disease limited to the tubes. Similarly, Gadducci et al. [48] reported no significant difference in the recurrence rate between patients with stage I disease who were treated with platinum-based combination chemotherapy and those who were not. However, the International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm (ICON)-1 and Adjuvant ChemoTherapy In Ovarian Neoplasm (ACTION) studies have shown that chemotherapy for early-stage patients with ovarian cancer did confer a survival benefit [98]. Nine hundred twenty-five patients (477 in ICON-1 and 448 in ACTION) who had surgery for early-stage ovarian cancer were randomly assigned to receive either platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 465) or observation (n = 460) until chemotherapy was indicated. The OS rates at 5 years were 82% in the chemotherapy arm and 74% in the observation arm (difference, 8%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; p = .008). The recurrence-free survival rate at 5 years was also better in the adjuvant chemotherapy arm than in the observation arm (76% vs. 65%; difference, 11%; HR, 0.64; p = .001). The same treatment strategy for early-stage disease could also be of benefit for patients with early-stage, high-risk PFTC.

Combination Chemotherapy for Advanced Disease
The current gold standard chemotherapy for EOC in North America is a platinum–taxane combination, and in Britain, it is platinum followed on relapse by a taxane. There are very few data that are extractable from the literature with regard to PFTC. Several authors using cisplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced PFTC reported overall responses rates of 53%–92% [4, 49, 50, 68, 70, 92, 94, 96, 99]. Peters et al. [50] reported a 75% complete response rate in a study of 46 patients with advanced or recurrent PFTC. Similarly, Gadducci et al. [48], among the 45 patients with advanced disease treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy, reported complete and partial responses in 64.4% and 17.8% of patients, respectively. The 5-year survival rate was 56% for the complete responders, whereas all the partial responders died within 56 months and all patients with stable or progressive disease died within 21 months. Literature data on small series showed the possible value of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (the CAP regimen) and paclitaxel-containing regimens [49, 70, 94, 100, 101]. Pectasides et al. [94] treated 14 patients with a CAP combination (10 patients) or carboplatin plus cyclophosphamide (four patients). Eight of these patients had a complete clinical response, and two had partial responses. Among the eight complete responders, five patients underwent a second-look operation, and pCR was confirmed in four of five of them.

Very few data exist on the activity of paclitaxel as first-line chemotherapy in patients with PFTC [100, 102, 103]. Gemignani et al. [104] reported their experience on the use of paclitaxel-based chemotherapy after initial surgery in 24 patients with PFTC, of whom 17 had stage III–IV disease. Twenty-three patients received paclitaxel at a dose of 135–175 mg/m2 with carboplatin or cisplatin; the majority, 17 of 23 (74%), received carboplatin. One patient received paclitaxel alone. The median disease progression-free survival rate at 3 years was 67% in the optimally debulked group, compared with 45% in the suboptimally debulked group. They concluded that optimally cytoreduced patients with PFTC treated with a paclitaxel-based chemotherapy regimen have an excellent possibility of survival. Similarly, Baekelandt et al. [105] administered the combination of carboplatin (area under the concentration–time curve [AUC] 6) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) to eight patients with PFTC, of whom four were chemotherapy-naïve and four had recurred after a platinum-free interval of at least 6 months. Three (37.5%) patients achieved a complete response and four (50%) had a partial response, for an overall response rate of 87.5%.

With regard to relapse therapy, all the information comes from EOC. Paclitaxel has been shown to have activity in platinum-pretreated patients with PFTC [104–107]. Tresukosol et al. [106] reported that paclitaxel at a dose of 200 mg/m2 produced a complete response in a patient with recurrent platinum-resistant disease, and Ichikawa et al. [107] reported that the combination of carboplatin (AUC 6) plus paclitaxel (180 mg/m2) achieved a complete response in a patient with a platinum-pretreated tumor. In EOC, there is evidence that using intraperitoneal therapy as one component may be more effective than i.v. chemotherapy for stage III, residual <1 cm, patients. Armstrong et al. [101] reported a statistically significant prolongation of progression-free survival and OS in the intraperitoneal arm, associated with a 25% lower risk for death compared with i.v. chemotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed stage III ovarian carcinoma or primary peritoneal carcinoma, optimally debulked. [101]. Although data from intraperitoneal therapy do not exist for PFTC, this type of treatment could possibly be recommended for the management of optimally debulked PFTC.

Another taxane, docetaxel, at a dose of 75–100 mg/m2, was administered in 30 assessable for response patients with EOC, PFTC, and peritoneal carcinomatosis who failed paclitaxel-based chemotherapy [103]. The overall response rate was 23% (one complete response and six partial responses), with a median survival time of 44 weeks (9.5 months). Nine patients had stable disease, and 14 had disease progression. Among the 19 patients who progressed during prior paclitaxel treatment, two (11%) responded to docetaxel, compared with five (45%) of the 11 patients in other paclitaxel-resistance categories. Recently, the combination of carboplatin (AUC 6) and docetaxel (60 mg/m2) delivered every 3 weeks for six courses showed activity (objective responses for 32 of 42 [81%] assessable patients) in the treatment of patients with EOC, PFTC, and peritoneal carcinomatosis who had either received no prior chemotherapy or had experienced a treatment-free interval of >2 years before developing disease recurrence [108]. The major toxicity was bone marrow suppression.

The same treatment strategy should be followed in the case of second-line chemotherapy for recurrent PFTC. Platinum-sensitive patients (relapse after 6 months) should be retreated with a platinum with or without paclitaxel, while platinum-refractory (progression during platinum-based therapy) or platinum-resistant (relapse within 6 months) patients should be treated with nonplatinum agents such as topotecan or liposomal doxorubicin. However, response rates of platinum analogues in the "less than 6 months group" are still in the 10%–15% range, and therefore one could argue that in all but truly platinum-refractory disease there is a role for using platinum analogues, given that the other agents in this scenario have similar low response rates. Topotecan has been investigated as salvage chemotherapy in patients who failed platinum- and paclitaxel-based chemotherapy [109, 110]. Dunton and Neufeld [111] used topotecan to treat a patient with PFTC who failed carboplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy. That patient demonstrated a complete clinical response to topotecan. Because myelosuppression is the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of topotecan when given at a dose of 1.5 mg/m2 for 5 days, new schedules of topotecan administration are currently being investigated for recurrent EOC, PFTC, and peritoneal carcinomatosis [112, 113]. Brown et al. [112] conducted a trial to determine the DLT and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of topotecan administered for 3 days every 21 days. Twenty patients with recurrent EOC, PFTC, or peritoneal carcinoma were treated with escalating doses of topotecan beginning at 2.50 mg/m2 on an outpatient basis. Colony-stimulating factors were not employed prophylactically but could be added for grade 4 marrow toxicity. They concluded that topotecan can be safely administered on schedule as an outpatient on days 1–3 every 21 days. The MTD was 3.75 mg/m2.

Liposomal doxorubicin has been reported to achieve response rates in the range of 17%–26% in patients with recurrent EOC after treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy [114, 115]. Eighty-two patients with EOC that either progressed on or recurred within 6 months of completion of platinum and paclitaxel chemotherapy were treated with liposomal doxorubicin at a dose of 50 mg/m2 every 4 weeks [115]. All patients had measurable disease. There was one complete response and 14 partial responses, for a total response rate of 16.9%. For platinum- and paclitaxel-refractory patients, the response rate was 18.3%. Markman et al. [116] demonstrated that liposomal doxorubicin at a dose of 40 mg/m2 every 4 weeks had limited activity (9%) in 49 platinum- and paclitaxel-refractory ovarian cancer patients but was associated with less toxicity than the standard dose.

The recommended treatment for PFTC is demonstrated in Table 5Go.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 5. Current postoperative treatment in primary fallopian tube carcinoma

 
Hormonotherapy
Hormonal agents increasingly have been used in PFTC. The rationale is that tubal epithelia undergo changes with hormonal fluctuation during the menstrual cycle. Embryologically and histologically the tubal epithelium is derived from the same source as the endometrial epithelium. Progestational agents have been used because of the known cyclic response of the normal tube to hormonal changes during the menstrual cycle [5, 85, 95]. Because no randomized trials exist and nearly all patients treated with progestational agents are also treated with combination chemotherapy, no firm conclusions can be drawn with regard to their usefulness. Steroid receptors have been found in a few cases, but their clinical role is unclear [28].


   PROGNOSTIC FACTORS AND SURVIVAL
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
Most recurrences are extrapelvic, and half or more of them are extraperitoneal, usually in combination with intraperitoneal recurrence [2, 44, 49, 50]. Most recurrences have been reported in the first 2–3 years [3, 91] but have also occurred many years later [50]. Because there is no effective second-line or salvage chemotherapy, recurrent disease is associated with a very poor prognosis.

The OS rate for patients with PFTC is approximately 30%–50%, compared with 40% for patients with EOC [13, 28, 71, 87, 92, 117]. This figure is somewhat higher than that for patients with EOC and possibly reflects the higher proportion of patients with early-stage disease. However, these figures have not changed significantly with time, indicating the need for further research. Stage of disease at the time of diagnosis is the most important factor affecting prognosis. Generally, the reported 5-year survival rate is about 65% or higher [15, 30, 99]. Benedet and Miller [118] collected 278 patients with PFTC from six literature series and calculated the 5-year survival rates in relation to stages: 62% for stage I, 36% for stage II, 17% for stage III, and 0% for stage IV. Similarly, Rosen et al. [119], in a retrospective analysis of 115 patients, found 5-year survival rates of 50.8% for stages I and II and 13.6% for stages III and IV. In a large population-based tumor registry study of 416 women with PFTC, the reported 5-year survival rate by stage was as follows: stage I (n = 102), 95%; stage II (n = 29), 75%; stage III (n = 52), 69%; and stage IV (n = 151), 45% [120]. Compared with 9,032 women treated for EOC during the same study period, patients with PFTC showed better survival stage by stage. The 5-year survival rates are influenced by the quality of surgical staging and the different therapeutic regimens used in these studies [120].

As in EOC, residual disease after initial surgery is also a significant prognostic factor [13, 44, 48, 50]. Patients with stage III–IV disease had a 5-year survival rate of 55% if the residual tumor was <1 cm in diameter, compared with 21% for those with larger residual tumor (p = .0169) [48].

With disease limited to the fallopian tube, the depth of invasion of the tubal wall was correlated with the risk for treatment failure [50]. The depth of invasion in stage I disease and intraoperative tumor rupture are independent prognostic factors [28, 46]. The presence or absence of invasion of the tubal wall, the depth of invasion when present, and the location of the tumor within the tube (fimbrial or nonfimbrial) appeared to be prognostically significant [71, 121].

The majority of studies looking at the degree of histological differentiation of the tumor as a prognostic factor have found this to be unhelpful [43, 44, 46, 47, 95, 117, 119]. However, Vaughan et al. [46] reported that grade significantly correlated with survival, and Gadducci et al. [48] found a correlation on univariate, but not multivariate, analysis. Supporting this is the recent finding that grade is correlated with lymphogenous metastases, with anaplastic tumors metastasizing early [122]. The presence of lymphocytic infiltration has also been suggested to be associated with a more favorable outcome [119]. Although there was a difference in the median and 5-year survival according to lymphocytic infiltration in the study of Vaughan et al. [46], this was not significant.

Other reported prognostic factors include advanced age [48, 71, 75, 105], serous versus endometrioid, bilaterality, positive peritoneal cytology, site of tumor within the tube (fimbrial versus nonfimbrial), HER-2/neu expression, p53 alteration [76, 77], and elevated pretreatment CA-125 level [28, 34, 48, 71, 117]. The importance of an occlusion of the abdominal tubal ostium that could possibly prevent or delay local spread is not clear [123]. The role of DNA-ploidy is negligible [124]. PFTC shares several biologic and clinical features with EOC. However, when compared with EOC, PFTC more often tends to recur in retroperitoneal nodes and distant sites. Stage, patient age, and among patients with advanced disease, residual tumor after initial surgery are the most important prognostic factors for survival [124, 125].


   CONCLUSION
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 
PFTC is a rare tumor accounting for <1% of all female genital tract cancers. Histologically and clinically, it resembles EOC. The diagnosis of PFTC is rarely considered preoperatively and is usually first appreciated at the time of operation or by a pathologist. Both carcinomas have a similar age distribution, are more common among nulliparous women, and are often of serous papillary histology. Surgery should consist of total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, omentectomy, and lymph node dissection from the pelvic and para-aortic regions. Aggressive debulking surgery should be attempted in patients with advanced disease. PFTC is similar to EOC in surgical staging, surgical management, and indications for adjuvant chemotherapy. Both carcinomas have a poor prognosis with stage and residual tumor size and respond to platinum-based chemotherapy. However, there are two differences between the two diseases: PFTC is more often diagnosed at an earlier stage, and the role of routine lymphadenectomy is well established and is mandatory in PFTC. Stage and residual tumor are the most important prognostic factors for outcome. Patients with stage I low-risk disease submitted to optimal surgical staging may not receive postoperative treatment. In contrast, patients with stage I low-risk disease not submitted to complete surgical staging, as well as those with stage I high-risk disease or stage IIA disease, should receive 3–6 cycles of adjuvant carboplatin plus paclitaxel. Patients with advanced disease should be treated with a combination of carboplatin plus paclitaxel, as with EOC. Second-line treatment for persistent/recurrent disease should be based on the platinum-free interval, whereas secondary cytoreduction should be considered only for highly selected patients with localized late relapse. More extensive clinical research must be performed in order to have definite etiologic, diagnostic, and management modalities, and prognostic markers.


   DISCLOSURE OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
References
 
The authors indicate no potential conflicts of interest.


   REFERENCES
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Etiology
 Clinical Manifestations
 Imaging
 CA-125 Level
 Cytology
 Pathology
 Pattern of Spread and...
 Treatment
 Adjuvant Chemotherapy
 Prognostic Factors and Survival
 Conclusion
 Disclosure of Potential...
 References
 

  1. Sedlis A. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1961;16:209–226.[Medline]
  2. Semrad N, Watring W, Fu YS et al. Fallopian tube adenocarcinoma: common extraperitoneal recurrence. Gynecol Oncol 1986;24:230–235.[CrossRef][Medline]
  3. Roberts JA, Lifshitz S. Primary adenocarcinoma of the fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol 1982;13:301–308.[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Raju KS, Barker GH, Wiltshaw E. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Report of 22 cases. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1981;88:1124–1129.[Medline]
  5. Brown MD, Kohorn EI, Kapp DS et al. Fallopian tube carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1985;11:583–590.[Medline]
  6. Eddy GL, Copeland LJ, Gershenson DM et al. Second-look laparotomy in fallopian tube carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1984;19:182–186.[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Riska A, Leminen A, Pukkala E. Sociodemographic determinants of incidence of primary fallopian tube carcinoma, Finland 1953–97. Int J Cancer 2003;104:643–645.[CrossRef][Medline]
  8. Rosenblatt KA, Weiss NS, Schwartz SM. Incidence of malignant fallopian tube tumors. Gynecol Oncol 1989;35:236–239.[CrossRef][Medline]
  9. Woolas RP, Smith JHF, Sarharnis P et al. Fallopian tube carcinoma: an under-recognized primary neoplasm. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1997;7:284–288.[CrossRef]
  10. Rosen AC, Klein M, Hafner E et al. Management and prognosis of primary fallopian tube carcinoma. Austrian Cooperative Study Group for Fallopian Tube Carcinoma. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1999;47:45–51.[CrossRef][Medline]
  11. Henderson SR, Harper RC, Salazar OM et al. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube: difficulties of diagnosis and treatment. Gynecol Oncol 1977;5:168–179.[CrossRef][Medline]
  12. Asmussen M, Kaern J, Kjoerstad K et al. Primary adenocarcinoma localized to the fallopian tubes: report on 33 cases. Gynecol Oncol 1988;30:183–186.[CrossRef][Medline]
  13. Woolas R, Jacobs I, Davies AP et al. What is the true incidence of primary fallopian tube carcinoma? Int J Gynecol Cancer 1994;4:384–388.[CrossRef][Medline]
  14. Wang PH, Yuan CC, Chao HT et al. Prognosis of primary fallopian tube adenocarcinoma: report of 25 patients. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1998;19:571–574.[Medline]
  15. Inal MM, Hanhan M, Pilanci B et al. Fallopian tube malignancies: experience of Social Security Agency Aegean Maternity Hospital. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2004;14:595–599.[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Demopoulos RI, Aronov R, Mesia A. Clues to the pathogenesis of fallopian tube carcinoma: a morphological and immunohistochemical case control study. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2001;20:128–132.[Medline]
  17. Meng ML, Gan-Gao, Scheng-Sun et al. Diagnosis of primary adenocarcinoma of the fallopian tube. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 1985;110:136–140.[CrossRef][Medline]
  18. Hanton EM, Malkasian GD Jr, Dahlin DC et al. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1966;94:832–839.[Medline]
  19. Tonin P, Moslehi R, Green R et al. Linkage analysis of 26 Canadian breast and breast-ovarian cancer families. Hum Genet 1995;95:545–550.[Medline]
  20. Rose PG, Shrigley R, Wiesner GL. Germline BRCA2 mutation in a patient with fallopian tube carcinoma: a case report. Gynecol Oncol 2000;77: 319–320.[CrossRef][Medline]
  21. Zweemer RP, van Diest PJ, Verheijen RH et al. Molecular evidence linking primary cancer of the fallopian tube to BRCA1 germline mutations. Gynecol Oncol 2000;76:45–50.[CrossRef][Medline]
  22. Aziz S, Kuperstein G, Rosen B et al. A genetic epidemiological study of carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol 2001;80:341–345.[CrossRef][Medline]
  23. Hebert-Blouin MN, Koufogianis V, Gillett P et al. Fallopian tube cancer in a BRCA1 mutation carrier: rapid development and failure of screening. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;186:53–54.[CrossRef][Medline]
  24. Jongsma AP, Piek JM, Zweemer RP et al. Molecular evidence for putative tumour suppressor genes on chromosome 13q specific to BRCA1 related ovarian and fallopian tube cancer. Mol Pathol 2002;55:305–309.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Yanai-Inbar I, Silverberg SG. Mucosal epithelial proliferation of the fallopian tube: prevalence, clinical associations, and optimal strategy for histopathologic assessment. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2000;19:139–144.[Medline]
  26. Jacobs AJ, McMurray EH, Parham J et al. Treatment of carcinoma of the fallopian tube using cisplatin, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide. Am J Clin Oncol 1986;9:436–439.[Medline]
  27. Paley PJ, Swisher EM, Garcia RL et al. Occult cancer of the fallopian tube in BRCA-1 germline mutation carriers at prophylactic oophorectomy: a case for recommending hysterectomy at surgical prophylaxis. Gynecol Oncol 2001;80:176–180.[CrossRef][Medline]
  28. Baekelandt M, Kockx M, Wesling F et al. Primary adenocarcinoma of the fallopian tube. Review of the literature. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1993;3:65–71.[CrossRef][Medline]
  29. Boutselis JG, Thompson JN. Clinical aspects of primary carcinoma of the Fallopian tube: a clinical study of 14 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1971;111:98–101.[Medline]
  30. Sedlis A. Carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Surg Clin North Am 1978;58:121–129.[Medline]
  31. Blaustein A. Tubal adenocarcinoma coexistent with other genital neoplasms. Obstet Gynecol 1963;21:62–66.[Medline]
  32. Ross WM, Ward CV, Lindsay CC. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. A report of 8 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1962;83:425–429.[Medline]
  33. Dodson MG, Ford JH Jr, Averette HE. Clinical aspects of fallopian tube carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 1970;36:935–939.[Medline]
  34. Ajithkumar TV, Minimole AL, John MM et al. Primary fallopian tube carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2005;60:247–252.[CrossRef][Medline]
  35. Markman M, Zaino R, Busowski J et al. Carcinoma of the fallopian tube. In: Hoskins WJ, Perez CA, Young RC, eds. Principles and Practice of Gynecologic Oncology. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott Co, 1992:783.
  36. Obermair A, Taylor KH, Janda M et al. Primary fallopian tube carcinoma: the Queensland experience. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2001;11:69–72.[CrossRef][Medline]
  37. Nikrui N, Duska LR. Fallopian tube carcinoma. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 1998;7:363–373.[Medline]
  38. Winter-Roach BA, Tjalma WA, Nordin AJ et al. Inguinal lymph node metastasis: an unusual presentation of fallopian tube carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2001;81:324–325.[CrossRef][Medline]
  39. Courville XF, Cortes Z, Katzman PJ et al. Case report: Bone metastases from fallopian tube carcinoma. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005;(434):278–281.
  40. Hidaka T, Nakamura T, Shima T et al. Cerebral metastasis from a primary adenocarcinoma of the fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol 2004;95:260–263.[CrossRef][Medline]
  41. Levite R, Fishman A, Kesler A et al. Paraneoplastic cerebellar degeneration heralding fallopian tube adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2001;11:169–171.[CrossRef][Medline]
  42. Chalmers JA, Marshall AT. Carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1976;83:580–583.[Medline]
  43. Pfeiffer P, Mogensen H, Amtrup F et al. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. A retrospective study of patients reported to the Danish Cancer Registry in a five-year period. Acta Oncol 1989;28:7–11.[Medline]
  44. Podratz KC, Podczaski ES, Gaffey TA et al. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986;154:1319–1326.[Medline]
  45. Huber-Buchholz MM, Buchholz NP, Staehelin J. Analysis of 23 cases of primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube over 50 years. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 1996;22):193–199.[Medline]
  46. Vaughan MM, Evans BD, Baranyai J et al. Survival of patients with primary fallopian tube carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1998;8:16–22.[CrossRef][Medline]
  47. Rose PG, Piver MS, Tsukada Y. Fallopian tube cancer. The Roswell Park experience. Cancer 1990;66:2661–2667.[CrossRef][Medline]
  48. Gadducci A, Landoni F, Sartori E et al. Analysis of treatment failures and survival of patients with fallopian tube carcinoma: a cooperation task force (CTF) study. Gynecol Oncol 2001;81:150–159.[CrossRef][Medline]
  49. McMurray EH, Jacobs AJ, Perez CA et al. Carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Management and sites of failure. Cancer 1986;58:2070–2075.[CrossRef][Medline]
  50. Peters WA 3rd, Andersen WA, Hopkins MP et al. Prognostic features of carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Obstet Gynecol 1988;71:757–762.[Medline]
  51. Zreik TG, Rutherford TJ. Psammoma bodies in cervicovaginal smears. Obstet Gynecol 2001;97:693–695.[CrossRef][Medline]
  52. van Nagell JR Jr, Higgins RV, Donaldson ES et al. Transvaginal sonography as a screening method for ovarian cancer. A report of the first 1000 cases screened. Cancer 1990;65:573–577.[CrossRef][Medline]
  53. Campbell S, Royston P, Bhan V et al. Novel screening strategies for early ovarian cancer by transabdominal ultrasonography. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990;97:304–311.[Medline]
  54. Timor-Tritsch IE, Rottem S. Transvaginal ultrasonographic study of the fallopian tube. Obstet Gynecol 1987;70:424–428.[Medline]
  55. Ajjimakorn S, Bhamarapravati Y, Israngura N. Ultrasound appearance of fallopian tube carcinoma. J Clin Ultrasound 1988;16:516–518.[Medline]
  56. Subramanyam BR, Raghavendra BN, Whalen CA et al. Ultrasonic features of fallopian tube carcinoma. J Ultrasound Med 1984;3:391–393.[Abstract]
  57. Kol S, Gal D, Friedman M et al. Preoperative diagnosis of fallopian tube carcinoma by transvaginal sonography and CA-125. Gynecol Oncol 1990;37:129–131.[CrossRef][Medline]
  58. Kurjak A, Kupesic S, Ilijas M et al. Preoperative diagnosis of primary fallopian tube carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1998;68:29–34.[CrossRef][Medline]
  59. Kurjak A, Kupesic S, Sparac V et al. Three-dimensional ultrasonographic and power Doppler characterization of ovarian lesions. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000;16:365–371.[CrossRef][Medline]
  60. Kurachi H, Maeda T, Murakami T et al. A case of fallopian tube carcinoma: successful preoperative diagnosis with MR imaging. Radiat Med 1999;17:63–66.[Medline]
  61. Kawakami S, Togashi K, Kimura I et al. Primary malignant tumor of the fallopian tube: appearance at CT and MR imaging. Radiology 1993;186:503–508.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  62. Puls LE, Davey DD, DePriest PD et al. Immunohistochemical staining for CA-125 in fallopian tube carcinomas. Gynecol Oncol 1993;48:360–363.[CrossRef][Medline]
  63. Niloff JM, Knapp RC, Schaetzl E et al. CA125 antigen levels in obstetric and gynecologic patients. Obstet Gynecol 1984;64:703–707.[Medline]
  64. Tokunaga T, Miyazaki K, Matsuyama S et al. Serial measurement of CA 125 in patients with primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol 1990;36:335–337.[CrossRef][Medline]
  65. Hefler LA, Rosen AC, Graf AH et al. The clinical value of serum concentrations of cancer antigen 125 in patients with primary fallopian tube carcinoma: a multicenter study. Cancer 2000;89:1555–1560.[CrossRef][Medline]
  66. Lootsma-Miklosova E, Aalders JG, Willemse PH et al. Levels of CA 125 in patients with recurrent carcinoma of the fallopian tube: two case histories. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1987;24:231–235.[Medline]
  67. Hirai Y, Kaku S, Teshima H et al. Clinical study of primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube: experience with 15 cases. Gynecol Oncol 1989;34:20–26.[CrossRef][Medline]
  68. Muntz HG, Tarraza HM, Granai CO et al. Primary adenocarcinoma of the fallopian tube. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1989;10:239–249.[Medline]
  69. Takashina T, Ito E, Kudo R. Cytologic diagnosis of primary tubal cancer. Acta Cytol 1985;29:367–372.[Medline]
  70. Maxson WZ, Stehman FB, Ulbright TM et al. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube: evidence for activity of cisplatin combination therapy. Gynecol Oncol 1987;26:305–313.[CrossRef][Medline]
  71. Alvarado-Cabrero I, Young RH, Vamvakas EC et al. Carcinoma of the fallopian tube: a clinicopathological study of 105 cases with observations on staging and prognostic factors. Gynecol Oncol 1999;72:367–379.[CrossRef][Medline]
  72. Hu CY, Taymor ML, Hertig AT. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1950;59:58–67.[Medline]
  73. Hellstrom AC, Silfversward C, Nilsson B et al. Carcinoma of the fallopian tube. A clinical and histopathologic review. The Radiumhemmet series. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1994;4:395–400.[CrossRef][Medline]
  74. di Re E, Grosso G, Raspagliesi F et al. Fallopian tube cancer: incidence and role of lymphatic spread. Gynecol Oncol 1996;62:199–202.[CrossRef][Medline]
  75. Lacy MQ, Hartmann LC, Keeney GL et al. c-erbB-2 and p53 expression in fallopian tube carcinoma. Cancer 1995;75:2891–2896.[CrossRef][Medline]
  76. Zheng W, Sung CJ, Cao P et al. Early occurrence and prognostic significance of p53 alteration in primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol 1997;64:38–48.[CrossRef][Medline]
  77. Rosen AC, Ausch C, Klein M et al. p53 expression in fallopian tube carcinomas. Cancer Lett 2000;156:1–7.[CrossRef][Medline]
  78. Hellstrom AC, Blegen H, Malec M et al. Recurrent fallopian tube carcinoma: TP53 mutation and clinical course. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2000;19:145–151.[Medline]
  79. Chung TK, Cheung TH, To KF et al. Overexpression of p53 and HER-2/neu and c-myc in primary fallopian tube carcinoma. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2000;49:47–51.[CrossRef][Medline]
  80. Yoonessi M. Carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1979;34:257–270.[Medline]
  81. Schiller HM, Silverberg SG. Staging and prognosis in primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Cancer 1971;28:389–395.[CrossRef][Medline]
  82. Kinzel GE. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1976;125:816–820.[Medline]
  83. Wolfson AH, Tralins KS, Greven KM et al. Adenocarcinoma of the fallopian tube: results of a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of 72 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998;40:71–76.[CrossRef][Medline]
  84. Amendola BE, LaRouere J, Amendola MA et al. Adenocarcinoma of the fallopian tube. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1983;157:223–227.[Medline]
  85. Tamimi HK, Figge DC. Adenocarcinoma of the uterine tube: potential for lymph node metastases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981;141:132–137.[Medline]
  86. Erez S, Kaplan AL, Wall JA. Clinical staging of carcinoma of the uterine tube. Obstet Gynecol 1967;30:547–550.[Medline]
  87. Momtazee S, Kempson RL. Primary adenocarcinoma of the fallopian tube. Obstet Gynecol 1968;32:649–656.[Medline]
  88. Clark DG, Brunschwig A. Total pelvic exenteration for recurrent carcinoma for the uterine tube. Report of a case. Obstet Gynecol 1964;24: 569–571.[Medline]
  89. Klein M, Rosen AC, Lahousen M et al. Lymphadenectomy in primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Cancer Lett 1999;147:63–66.[CrossRef][Medline]
  90. Rauthe G, Vahrson HW, Burkhardt E. Primary cancer of the fallopian tube. Treatment and results of 37 cases. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1998;19:356–362.[Medline]
  91. Takeshima N, Hasumi K. Treatment of fallopian tube cancer. Review of the literature. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2000;264:13–19.[CrossRef][Medline]
  92. Barakat RR, Rubin SC, Saigo PE et al. Second-look laparotomy in carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:748–751.[Medline]
  93. Harrison CR, Averette HE, Jarrell MA et al. Carcinoma of the fallopian tube: clinical management. Gynecol Oncol 1989;32:357–359.[CrossRef][Medline]
  94. Pectasides D, Barbounis V, Sintila A et al. Treatment of primary fallopian tube carcinoma with cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. Am J Clin Oncol 1994;17:68–71.[Medline]
  95. Denham JW, Maclennan KA. The management of primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Experience of 40 cases. Cancer 1984;53:166–172.[CrossRef][Medline]
  96. King A, Seraj IM, Thrasher T et al. Fallopian tube carcinoma: a clinicopathological study of 17 cases. Gynecol Oncol 1989;33:351–355.[CrossRef][Medline]
  97. Klein M, Rosen A, Lahousen M et al. The relevance of adjuvant therapy in primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube, stages I and II: irradiation vs. chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;48:1427–1431.[CrossRef][Medline]
  98. Trimbos JB, Parmar M, Vergote I et al. International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm trial 1 and Adjuvant ChemoTherapy in Ovarian Neoplasm trial: two parallel randomized phase III trials of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early-stage ovarian carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:105–112.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  99. Deppe G, Bruckner HW, Cohen CJ. Combination chemotherapy for advanced carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Obstet Gynecol 1980;56: 530–532.[Medline]
  100. Muntz HG, Tarraza HM, Goff BA et al. Combination chemotherapy in advanced adenocarcinoma of the fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol 1991;40:268–273.[CrossRef][Medline]
  101. Armstrong DK, Bundy B, Wenzel L et al. Intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel in ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 2006;354:34–43.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  102. Ben-Hur H, Dgani R, Ben-Arie A et al. Diagnostic dilemmas and current therapy of fallopian tube cancer. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1999;20:108–109.[Medline]
  103. Verschraegen CF, Sittisomwong T, Kudelka AP et al. Docetaxel for patients with paclitaxel-resistant Mullerian carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:2733–2739.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  104. Gemignani ML, Hensley ML, Cohen R et al. Paclitaxel-based chemotherapy in carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol 2001;80:16–20.[CrossRef][Medline]
  105. Baekelandt M, Jorunn Nesbakken A, Kristensen GB et al. Carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Cancer 2000;89:2076–2084.[CrossRef][Medline]
  106. Tresukosol D, Kudelka AP, Edwards CL et al. Primary fallopian tube adenocarcinoma: clinical complete response after salvage treatment with high-dose paclitaxel. Gynecol Oncol 1995;58:258–261.[CrossRef][Medline]
  107. Ichikawa Y, Tsunoda H, Nishide K et al. Metachronous carcinoma of the vulva and fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol 2000;77:206–209.[CrossRef][Medline]
  108. Markman M, Kennedy A, Webster K et al. Combination chemotherapy with carboplatin and docetaxel in the treatment of cancers of the ovary and fallopian tube and primary carcinoma of the peritoneum. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:1901–1905.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  109. Bookman MA, Malmstrom H, Bolis G et al. Topotecan for the treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: an open-label phase II study in patients treated after prior chemotherapy that contained cisplatin or carboplatin and paclitaxel. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:3345–3352.[Abstract]
  110. Hoskins P, Eisenhauer E, Beare S et al. Randomized phase II study of two schedules of topotecan in previously treated patients with ovarian cancer: a National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group study. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:2233–2237.[Abstract]
  111. Dunton CJ, Neufeld J. Complete response to topotecan of recurrent fallopian tube carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2000;76:128–129.[CrossRef][Medline]
  112. Brown JV 3rd, Peters WA 3rd, Rettenmaier MA et al. A phase I trial of a 3-day topotecan Q 21 days for recurrent epithelial cancers of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum. Gynecol Oncol 2000;79:495–498.[CrossRef][Medline]
  113. Markman M, Kennedy A, Webster K et al. Phase 2 evaluation of topotecan administered on a 3-day schedule in the treatment of platinum- and paclitaxel-refractory ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2000;79:116–119.[CrossRef][Medline]
  114. Muggia FM, Hainsworth JD, Jeffers S et al. Phase II study of liposomal doxorubicin in refractory ovarian cancer: antitumor activity and toxicity modification by liposomal encapsulation. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:987–993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  115. Gordon AN, Granai CO, Rose PG et al. Phase II study of liposomal doxorubicin in platinum- and paclitaxel-refractory epithelial ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3093–3100.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  116. Markman M, Kennedy A, Webster K et al. Phase 2 trial of liposomal doxorubicin (40 mg/m(2)) in platinum/paclitaxel-refractory ovarian and fallopian tube cancers and primary carcinoma of the peritoneum. Gynecol Oncol 2000;78:369–372.[CrossRef][Medline]
  117. Piura B, Rabinovich A. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube: study of 11 cases. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2000;91:169–175.[CrossRef][Medline]
  118. Benedet JL, Miller DM. Tumors of fallopian tube: clinical features, staging and management. In: Coppleson M, Monoghan JM, Morrow CP et al., eds. Gynecologic Oncology: Fundamental Principles and Clinical Practice. Edinburgh, London, Melbourne, New York and Tokyo: Churchill Livingstone, 1992:853–860.
  119. Rosen A, Klein M, Lahousen M et al. Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube--a retrospective analysis of 115 patients. Austrian Cooperative Study Group for Fallopian Tube Carcinoma. Br J Cancer 1993;68:605–609.[Medline]
  120. Kosary C, Trimble EL. Treatment and survival for women with Fallopian tube carcinoma: a population-based study. Gynecol Oncol 2002;86: 190–191.[CrossRef][Medline]
  121. Alvarado-Cabrero I, Navani SS, Young RH et al. Tumors of the fimbriated end of the fallopian tube: a clinicopathologic analysis of 20 cases, including nine carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1997;16:189–196.[Medline]
  122. Klein M, Rosen A, Lahousen M et al. Lymphogenous metastasis in the primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol 1994;55:336–338.[CrossRef][Medline]
  123. Green TH Jr, Scully RE. Tumors of the fallopian tube. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1962;5:886–906.[Medline]
  124. Klein M, Graf AH, Rosen A et al. Tumor progression, histologic grading and DNA-ploidy as predictive factors of lymphogenous metastasis in primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Cancer Lett 2002;177:209–214.[CrossRef][Medline]
  125. Gadducci A. Current management of fallopian tube carcinoma. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2002;14:27–32.[CrossRef][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
D. L. Brown, K. M. Dudiak, and F. C. Laing
Adnexal Masses: US Characterization and Reporting
Radiology, February 1, 2010; 254(2): 342 - 354.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
M. T. Goodman and Y. B. Shvetsov
Incidence of Ovarian, Peritoneal, and Fallopian Tube Carcinomas in the United States, 1995-2004
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., January 1, 2009; 18(1): 132 - 139.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
A. A. Tone, H. Begley, M. Sharma, J. Murphy, B. Rosen, T. J. Brown, and P. A. Shaw
Gene Expression Profiles of Luteal Phase Fallopian Tube Epithelium from BRCA Mutation Carriers Resemble High-Grade Serous Carcinoma
Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2008; 14(13): 4067 - 4078.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow eLetters: Submit a response to this article
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Reprints/Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pectasides, D.
Right arrow Articles by Economopoulos, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pectasides, D.
Right arrow Articles by Economopoulos, T.

HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
THE ONCOLOGIST STEM CELLS CME ALPHAMED PRESS JOURNALS