Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2026 Feb;105(2):368-376.
doi: 10.1111/aogs.70106. Epub 2025 Dec 21.

Biopsy-proven residual cervical cancer at the end of combined chemoradiation predicts poor outcome-Retrospective single-center cohort study

Affiliations
Observational Study

Biopsy-proven residual cervical cancer at the end of combined chemoradiation predicts poor outcome-Retrospective single-center cohort study

Christoph Ebner et al. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2026 Feb.

Abstract

Introduction: Persistent tumor after combined chemoradiation for locally advanced cervical cancer is an established prognostic factor. Detection may include magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography (PET) combined with CT scan, ultrasound, or biopsies; however, no agreement about the best method and time point has been reached. In our institution, a standardized biopsy protocol of at least four punch biopsies is routinely performed at the last brachytherapy with re-biopsies 6 weeks later in cases not showing histologic complete response (hCR). This study aims to assess the prognostic relevance of these biopsies, especially with respect to the time point of hCR.

Material and methods: This investigation was a retrospective single-center observational cohort study that included all patients treated for locally advanced or node-positive cervical cancer with combined chemoradiation at the University Hospital Innsbruck between 2008 and 2023. Patients with a hCR at the end of radiotherapy were classified as primary negative and otherwise as primary positive. Primary positive patients that achieved complete response at a control biopsy 6 weeks later were classified as secondary negative, and the remaining patients with residual tumor as secondary positive. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between all these groups.

Results: We included 184 patients in this study, from which 46 (25%) were classified as primary positive. These patients experienced a significantly worse PFS compared to primary negative patients (p = 0.008, HR = 2.03, 95% CI [1.20, 3.45]). The difference in PFS was also evidenced when comparing primary negative patients to those who had a hCR 6 weeks after radiotherapy (secondary negative) (p = 0.018, HR = 2.00, 95% CI [1.13, 3.56]). However, in primary positive patients, OS was not significantly reduced (p = 0.29, HR = 1.45, 95% CI [0.73, 2.86]).

Conclusions: Early response evaluation using punch biopsies at the time of the last brachytherapy can identify patients with residual tumor, which exhibit a statistically significant and clinically meaningful risk of disease progression. This risk was not reversed even in the case of a delayed hCR 6 weeks after completion of chemoradiation.

Keywords: biopsy; cervical cancer; chemoradiation; follow‐up; persistence; radiotherapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Christoph Ebner: Honoraria from AbbVie, travel support, and congress invitations from AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Novartis, GSK, and PharmaMar. Christoph Purtscheller: No conflicts of interest declared. Barin Feroz: Travel support and congress invitations from Roche, Pfizer, Lilly, and Novartis. Jana Rieker: No conflicts of interest declared. Linda Ebner: No conflicts of interest declared. Mara Mantovan: No conflicts of interest declared. Sergej Skvortsov: No conflicts of interest declared. Mario Brüggl: No conflicts of interest declared. Katharina Leitner: Travel support and congress invitations from GSK, MSD, Eisai, and Roche. Verena Wieser: No conflicts of interest declared. Irina Tsibulak: Advisory board participation for AstraZeneca; honoraria from AbbVie, MSD, AstraZeneca, Roche, and PharmaMar; travel support and congress invitations from AstraZeneca, Roche, GSK, Eisai, Daiichi Sankyo, and PharmaMar. Christian Marth: Funded research from the European Union (EU), Austrian Science Fund (FWF), AstraZeneca, and Roche; honoraria and congress invitations from MSD, AstraZeneca, GSK, Genmab, and AbbVie; consulting and advisory board activities for Roche, Novartis, Amgen, MSD, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, PharmaMar, BioNTech, GSK, Genmab, and AbbVie. Alain Gustave Zeimet: Funded research from the European Union (EU), Austrian Science Fund (FWF), AstraZeneca, Roche, and PharmaMar; honoraria and congress invitations from Roche, Novartis, Amgen, MSD, AstraZeneca, Eisai Inc., PharmaMar, GSK, Tesaro, Roche Diagnostics, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, and Gilead; consulting and advisory board activities for Roche, Roche Diagnostics, Novartis, Amgen, MSD, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Pfizer, PharmaMar, GSK, Tesaro, Clovis, Biocad, Eisai Inc., AbbVie, Sandoz.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Flow diagram showing patient inclusion process and biopsy results at the end of CRT and after 6 weeks (hCR, histologic complete response; CRT, chemoradiotherapy).
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Kaplan–Meier curves showing PFS (A) and OS (B) comparing patients with primary negative vs. primary positive biopsy results after CRT.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression for progression‐free survival (PFS). The plot shows adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals for the risk of disease progression or recurrence. The reference group for each categorical variable is as follows: primary negative biopsy (vs. primary positive biopsy), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (vs. adenocarcinoma), no lymph node involvement, FIGO I, and tumor grade 1.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Kaplan–Meier curves showing PFS comparing patients with primary negative vs. secondary negative biopsy results (A) and PFS comparing patients with secondary negative vs. secondary positive biopsy results (B) 6 weeks after CRT.

References

    1. Cibula D, Raspollini MR, Planchamp F, et al. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer—update 2023*. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2023;33:649‐666. doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004429 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pötter R, Tanderup K, Schmid MP, et al. MRI‐guided adaptive brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer (EMBRACE‐I): a multicentre prospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22:538‐547. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30753-1 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sturdza A, Pötter R, Fokdal LU, et al. Image guided brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: improved pelvic control and survival in RetroEMBRACE, a multicenter cohort study. Radiother Oncol. 2016;120:428‐433. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.03.011 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schmid MP, Lindegaard JC, Mahantshetty U, et al. Risk factors for local failure following chemoradiation and magnetic resonance image–guided brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: results from the EMBRACE‐I study. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:1933‐1942. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.01096 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Knoth J, Nout RA, Pötter R, et al. Distant metastasis after chemoradiation and image guided adaptive brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2025;123:503‐512. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.04.037 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types