Retrospective non-comparative single-center study of platinum-based regimen efficacy in the 1st line therapy of high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas of gynecologic tract
- Authors: Suleymanova K.A.1, Zhulikov Y.A.1, Evdokimova E.V.1, Shevchuk A.S.1,2, Kachmasova A.K.1,3,4, Delektorskaya V.V.1, Markovich A.A.1, Stilidi I.S.1,2, Artamonova E.V.1,2,5
-
Affiliations:
- N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia
- N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
- Russian University of Medicine, Ministry of Health of Russia
- S. S. Yudin Moscow City Clinical Hospital, Moscow Healthcare Department
- M.F. Vladimirsky Moscow Regional Scientific Research Clinical Institute
- Issue: Vol 16, No 1 (2026)
- Pages: 40-49
- Section: ORIGINAL REPORT
- Published: 15.03.2026
- URL: https://onco-surgery.info/jour/article/view/821
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17650/2949-5857-2026-16-1-40-49
- ID: 821
Cite item
Abstract
Introduction. Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NEC) of gynecologic tract are rare and aggressive tumors for which there are currently no standardized approaches to systemic therapy. Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens are the main treatment method, but data on their efficacy are limited to a few retrospective studies.
Aim. To evaluate the efficacy of platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic gynecologic NEC, as well as the prognostic role of tumor histology, tumor location, disease extent, frequency of second-line therapy, and progression-free survival (PFS).
Materials and methods. A retrospective analysis was conducted of the efficacy of platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy for primary metastatic or recurrent (with a platinum-free interval ≥12 months) NEC of gynecologic tract at the N. N. Blokhin National Medical Research Centre for Oncology in 2017–2024.
Results. The most common site of primary tumor was the cervix (n = 18; 62.1 %), 5 patients had ovarian NEC (17.2 %), 3 had uterine NEC (10.3 %), 2 had vulvar NEC (6.9 %), and 1 case of vaginal NEC was diagnosed (3.4 %). In 15 patients (51.7 %), the disease was detected at stage IV, and in 14 (48.3 %), progression was noted after primary treatment with a platinum-free interval of ≥12 months. Small-cell histological type was detected in 17 patients (58.6 %), large-cell in 12 of 29 (41.4 %). The frequency of high microsatellite instability (MSI) cases was 13.3 % (2 out of 15 examined), and positive expression of somatostatin receptors 2 and / or 5 (SSTR) was found in 33.3 % (4 out of 12 examined). In most cases, etoposide + cisplatin / carboplatin regimens were used (n = 25; 86.2 %), and 4 patients (13.8 %) received the paclitaxel + carboplatin regimen. The objective response rate was 44.8 %; the median PFS was 7.5 months (95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.9–12.1), median overall survival (OS) was 14 months (95 % CI 13–16.2). Disease control ≥6 months was achieved in 15 (51.7 %) patients, ≥12 months in 6 (20.7 %). Peritoneal carcinomatosis was significantly associated with worse PFS (hazard ratio 4.37; p = 0.01), and ECOG status 1–2 was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio 3.4; p = 0.01). No statistically significant differences in survival were found between histological types.
Conclusion. First-line platinum-based chemotherapy demonstrates efficacy comparable to previously published data in metastatic NEC of gynecologic tract. The high frequency of MSI-high cases justifies its routine measurement. The expression of somatostatin receptors is of interest for further study as a prognostic and therapeutic marker.
About the authors
Khadizhat A. Suleymanova
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Author for correspondence.
Email: hadijatsuleymanova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3472-3106
Russian Federation, 24 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115522
Ya. A. Zhulikov
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Email: hadijatsuleymanova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4108-439X
Russian Federation, 24 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115522
E. V. Evdokimova
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Email: hadijatsuleymanova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5574-9970
Russian Federation, 24 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115522
A. S. Shevchuk
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia; N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Email: hadijatsuleymanova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9259-4525
Russian Federation, 24 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115522; 1 Ostrovityanova St., Moscow, 117513
A. K. Kachmasova
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia; Russian University of Medicine, Ministry of Health of Russia; S. S. Yudin Moscow City Clinical Hospital, Moscow Healthcare Department
Email: hadijatsuleymanova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0009-0005-2365-495X
Oncology Center No. 1
Russian Federation, 24 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115522; Build. 1, 20 Delegatskaya St., Moscow, 127473; Build. 7, 18A Zagorodnoye Shosse, Moscow, 117152V. V. Delektorskaya
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Email: hadijatsuleymanova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4550-2069
Russian Federation, 24 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115522
A. A. Markovich
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Email: hadijatsuleymanova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5548-1724
Russian Federation, 24 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115522
I. S. Stilidi
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia; N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Email: hadijatsuleymanova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5229-8203
Russian Federation, 24 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115522; 1 Ostrovityanova St., Moscow, 117513
E. V. Artamonova
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia; N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia; M.F. Vladimirsky Moscow Regional Scientific Research Clinical Institute
Email: hadijatsuleymanova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7728-9533
Russian Federation, 24 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115522; 1 Ostrovityanova St., Moscow, 117513; 61 / 2 Shchepkina St., Moscow, 129110
References
- Zhang X., Lv Z., Lou H. The clinicopathological features and treatment modalities associated with survival of neuroendocrine cervical carcinoma in a Chinese population. BMC Cancer 2019;19(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-5147-2
- Stecklein S.R., Jhingran A., Burzawa J. et al. Patterns of recurrence and survival in neuroendocrine cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2016;143(3):552–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.09.011
- Kefeli M., Usubütün A. An update of neuroendocrine tumors of the female reproductive system. Turk Patoloji Derg 2015;31: 128–44. doi: 10.5146/tjpath.2015.01320
- Crane E.K., Ramos P., Farley J.H. et al. Molecular profiling in a large cohort of gynecologic neuroendocrine tumors. Gynecol Oncol 2020;159:262. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.05.452
- Ishikawa M., Kasamatsu T., Tsuda H. et al. A multi-center retrospective study of neuroendocrine tumors of the uterine cervix: prognosis according to the new 2018 staging system, comparing outcomes for different chemotherapeutic regimens and histopathological subtypes. Gynecol Oncol 2019;155(3): 444–51. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.09.018
- Castle P.E., Pierz A., Stoler M.H. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the attribution of human papillomavirus (HPV) in neuroendocrine cancers of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 2018;148(2):422–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.12.001
- Pang L., Wang S. Prevalence, associated factors, and survival outcomes of small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the gynecologic tract: a large population-based analysis. Front Med (Lausanne) 2022;9:836910. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.836910
- Salvo G., Martin A.G., Gonzales N.R., Frumovitz M. Updates and management algorithm for neuroendocrine tumors of the uterine cervix. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2019;29(6):986–95. doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2019-000504
- Cohen J.G., Kapp D.S., Shin J.Y. et al. Small cell carcinoma of the cervix: treatment and survival outcomes of 188 patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203(4):347.e341–6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.04.019
- Wang K.-L., Chang T.-C., Jung S.-M. et al. Primary treatment and prognostic factors of small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a Taiwanese Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Eur J Cancer 2012;48(10):1484–94. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.12.014
- Pei X., Xiang L., Ye S. et al. Cycles of cisplatin and etoposide affect treatment outcomes in patients with FIGO stage I–II small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 2017;147:589–96. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.09.022
- Yuan L., Jiang H., Lu Y. et al. Prognostic factors of surgically treated early-stage small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the cervix. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2015;25(7):1315–21. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000496
- Gardner G.J., Reidy-Lagunes D., Gehrig P.A. Neuroendocrine tumors of the gynecologic tract: a Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) clinical document. Gynecol Oncol 2011;122(1):190–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.04.011
- Chen J., Sun Y., Chen L. et al. Prognostic factors and treatment of neuroendocrine tumors of the uterine cervix based on the FIGO 2018 staging system: a single-institution study of 172 patients. PeerJ 2021;9:e11563. doi: 10.7717/peerj.11563
Supplementary files

