
==== Front
BMJ Open
BMJ Open
bmjopen
bmjopen
BMJ Open
2044-6055
BMJ Publishing Group BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR

39209505
10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077960
bmjopen-2023-077960
Original Research
Obstetrics and Gynaecology
1845
1506
Influence of stage and age on survival of patients with vulvar cancer in Germany: a retrospective study
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3120-7384
Mack Luisa Carlotta 1luisacarlottamack@gmail.com

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8795-7352
Hagemeier Anna 2anna.hagemeier@uni-koeln.de

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5068-3933
Forner Dirk Michael 1dirk.forner@evkk.de

1 Gynaecology, Gynaecologic Oncology and Obstetrics, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Kalk, Koln, Germany
2 Institute of Medical Statistics and Computational Biology, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Koln, Germany
DrDirk MichaelForner; dirk.forner@evkk.de
None declared.

2024
28 8 2024
14 8 e07796021 7 2023
01 8 2024
Copyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the 5-year survival rate of patients with vulvar cancer, taking into account prognostic factors (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage and age) and the influence of lymph node involvement and tumour size as well as the correlation between FIGO stage and age at onset.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

German cancer registries.

Participants

The study included 17 017 patients diagnosed with vulvar cancer between 2004 and 2014 with follow-up until 2017. Exclusion criteria were incomplete documentation, age<18 years and death certificate only.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

The primary outcome was overall and relative survival according to FIGO stage and age and the distribution of FIGO stages by age group. Secondary outcomes analysed were tumour size and lymph node status as risk factors for mortality.

Results

The median age at diagnosis was 70 years. The overall 5-year survival rate was 69.5% (95% CI: 68.7% to 70.3%). The 5-year relative survival rates ranged from 91.9% (95% CI: 90.5% to 93.3%) to 21.3% (95% CI: 15.6% to 27.0%) for FIGO I to FIGO IVB and from 89.2% (95% CI: 87.6% to 90.8%) to 68.0% (95% CI: 65.3% to 70.7%) for age groups <55 to >75 years. Younger patients were significantly more often diagnosed with a low FIGO stage (p<0.001). Lymph node status and tumour size were independent factors influencing survival (HR: 1.79 (95% CI: 1.73 to 1.84; p<0.001) and 1.88 (95% CI: 1.80 to 1.96); p<0.001, respectively). The median follow-up time was 57 months.

Conclusion

Notably, the steepest decline in survival occurred within the first 3 years after diagnosis. Patients with the highest FIGO stages and those in the oldest age group had the worst survival rates. Furthermore, patients in the oldest age group were more likely to be diagnosed at higher stages. Lymph node status and tumour size were additional independent prognostic factors for mortality.

GYNAECOLOGY
Gynaecological oncology
Gynaecological oncology
Adult oncology
EPIDEMIOLOGY
==== Body
pmcStrengths and limitations of this study

This study on a rare malignancy included a large sample size of >17 000 patients.

This study focused on age as an independent prognostic factor for survival and as a factor for stage distribution.

The age groups indicated in this study represented young (premenopausal and perimenopausal), middle-aged (postmenopausal) and older women.

This is a purely retrospective register study which relies on pre-existing data that may be incomplete, inconsistent or biased, limiting the ability to establish causality and control for confounding variables.

Introduction

Vulvar cancer is the fourth most common female genital cancer accounting for 1.4% of all new cases of cancer in women in Germany in 2016.1 Squamous cell carcinomas are the most common (>95%) followed by basal cell carcinoma, undifferentiated carcinoma and adenocarcinoma.2 Especially older women are majorly affected. Recent epidemiological studies have reported changes in the incidence rates of vulvar cancer in Germany, Europe and Asia, especially in younger women with an annual increase of 0.5–1.9%.139 The 5-year relative survival rate based on the extent of disease as reflected by the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification in the USA between 2012 and 2018 was 70.3%.10 The 5-year survival rate in the USA was 86.3% for FIGO I and 18.3% for FIGO IVB.11 Notably, most cases are diagnosed at an early stage; however, lymph nodes are already affected at the time of diagnosis in 20% of patients.1 Studies have shown that lymph node metastasis is a major prognostic factor.12 13 Various studies have reported varying results on whether age is a risk factor for recurrence.13 14 There are some studies on survival time depending on the FIGO stage whereas there are only a few on how age affects prognosis.

The present study aimed to determine the difference in the 5-year survival rate according to tumour stages in our large cohort of>17 000 women with vulvar cancer in Germany between 2004 and 2017. We also aimed to determine whether age at diagnosis influences the relative survival rate by comparing different age groups and their survival rates. Finally, we aimed to determine whether the distribution of tumour stages changes according to the age group. The impact of lymph node involvement and the local size of the tumour on the survival rate was also investigated. As vulvar cancer metastasis is primarily lymphogenous, positive inguinofemoral lymph nodes are expected when searching for distant metastasis.15 This leads to the hypothesis that staging for distant metastasis is not mandatory when regional lymph nodes are cancer-free.16 This hypothesis was tested in the present study.

Methods

Data source

This retrospective study is based on the datasets of the German Centre for Cancer Registry Data (ZfKD) at the Robert Koch Institute and includes all reported cases of newly diagnosed malignant neoplasm of the vulva (International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10) C51) in Germany between 2004 and 2014 with follow-up until 2017.

ZfKD is a population-based cancer registry that uses the cause of death statistics to achieve the best coverage of cancer cases in Germany.17

Data on the patient’s dates of birth, diagnosis and death and the ICD-10 code, tumour–node–metastasis (TNM) classification as per the Union for International Cancer Control Classification of Malignant Tumours, grading and mortality status without further information on the cause of death were collected and analysed. The TNM classification was according to the fifth, sixth or seventh edition. During the study period, the classifications changed as well as the report in the registry.18 19 The end of follow-up was indicated by death notification in the registry.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined. N=27.506 patients with a diagnosis of vulvar cancer (ICD-10 C51) were registered in the ZfKD between 2004 and 2014. Cases with incomplete staging, not assignable to FIGO classification or age<18 years were excluded. These criteria resulted in the exclusion of cases with missing T-stage (n=6855) unless M1 stage was present, cases of T0 with M1 (n=2) and cases with missing N stage (n=3620) unless T1a or M1 was present. In these cases, lymph node staging is not mandatory. Missing date of death (n=7), age<18 years (n=4) and use of TNM fourth edition (n=1) also led to exclusion. Finally, 17 017 patients were included in the descriptive analysis. Cases with missing T stage and M1 (n=154) and cases with death certificate only (n=50) were additionally excluded leaving 16 813 patients for the survival analyses.

There was no patient or public involvement in this study.

Staging and grouping

This study aimed to analyse the impact of different stages of vulvar cancer, age at diagnosis and lymph node status on the survival rates of patients with vulvar cancer. Therefore, the TNM stages in the data sets were converted into the 2009 FIGO classification according to the respective TNM classification.20 FIGO I includes tumours localised to the vulva whereas FIGO II includes tumours infiltrating neighbouring structures. FIGO III includes tumours with lymph node involvement and locally invasive grafted tumours. FIGO IVA includes tumours that invade the vaginal, bladder or rectal mucosa or are fixed to the pelvic bone and/or involve fixed or ulcerated inguinofemoral lymph nodes. FIGO IVB is any stage with metastasis involving pelvic lymph nodes.20 To investigate the influence of age on survival rates, the patients were divided into three groups according to the age at the time of diagnosis to represent young (premenopausal and perimenopausal women), middle-aged (postmenopausal women) and older women in their senior years. Holleczek et al conducted a cancer registry study regarding changes in the incidence of vulvar cancer in Saarland, a German federal state, defined the age groups they compared along the same lines: Group 1, ≤54 years; Group 2, 55–74 years; and Group 3, ≥75 years.4

Statistical methods

Categorical variables are presented as absolute and relative frequencies and continuous variables as means with SD and ranges and as additional medians with IQR. Survival time analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox regression. The Cox regression model included FIGO stage, age group and N and T stage as covariates with FIGO I, Group 1, N0 and T1 as references. Differences within the Kaplan-Meier analysis were analysed using log-rank tests. Relative survival was estimated using the function ‘period’ from the package ‘periodR’—for R (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).21 The relative survival results were determined by comparing the overall survival of the study cohort with the survival of the German population of the corresponding sex and age group. The expected survival in the population was determined from mortality tables according to the ‘Ederer II’ method.22 For all comparisons, statistical significance was set at α=0.05. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics for Windows (V.25.0; IBM, Armonk, New York, USA) and R (V.3.6.1).23 24 Python programming language (V.3.11) and Matplotlib (V.3.8.2) were used for data visualisation.25 26

Results

Description

Between 2004 and 2014, 27 506 patients were diagnosed with vulvar neoplasia in Germany. The number of vulvar cancer cases reported in the cancer registries has increased over the years, almost doubling between 2004 (n=1397) and 2009 (n=2680). After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 17 017 cases were finally included in the study. The mean survival time was 109.8 months (95% CI: 108.7 to 110.9 months) and the median follow-up time was 57 months.

Notably, most women were diagnosed with localised stage I (n=9412; 55.3%) and II (n=2154; 12.7%) lesions followed by regional stage III (n=3734; 21.9%) and IVA (n=1096; 6.4%) lesions. Distant metastasis (stage IVB) was a rare occurrence (n=621; 3.6%) (table 1). Inguinofemoral lymph nodes were observed in 4832 cases. The median age at diagnosis was 70 years (range: 19–102 years) (table 1). Furthermore, most women were diagnosed in their eighth decade (70–79 years, n=5127; 30.1%). The IQR was between 57 and 78 years (21 years). Only 0.9% (n=243) of patients were aged≤30 years at the time of diagnosis. The median age at diagnosis increased with increasing stages (FIGO I: 68 years, FIGO IVB: 73 years) whereas the median age at death decreased with increasing stages (FIGO I: 80 years, FIGO IVB: 74 years) (table 1).

Table 1 Descriptive data of women diagnosed with vulvar cancer in Germany between 2004 and 2014

	n (%)	Age at diagnosis	Age at death	Survival time (months)	
Mean (range)	SD	Median (IQR)*	Mean (range)	SD	Median (IQR)	Mean (95% CI)	Median (95% CI)	
All	17 017 (100)	67.1 (19–102)	14.5	70 (57;78)	76.3 (22–103)	11.7	78 (70;85)	109.8 (108.7 to 110.9)	n.a.	
FIGO I	9412 (55.3)	65.2 (19–102)	14.8	68 (54;77)	78.3 (23–103)	11.3	80 (73;86)	131.8 (130.6 to 133.1)	n.a.	
FIGO II	2154 (12.7)	69.8 (24–100)	13.6	72 (62;80)	78.2 (33–102)	11.1	80 (72;86)	102.1 (99.3 to 104.9)	130 (n.a.)	
FIGO III	3734 (21.9)	68.9 (20–99)	13.9	72 (60;79)	75.2 (22–103)	11.6	77 (70;83)	84.8 (82.4 to 87.2)	69 (60.6 to 77.4)	
FIGO IVA	1096 (6.4)	70.5 (21–98)	12.9	73 (63;80)	74.2 (25–100)	11.7	76 (68;83)	57.6 (53.6 to 61.5)	21 (18.3 to 23.8)	
FIGO IVB	621 (3.6)	70.5 (20–98)	13.5	73 (63;80)	72.0 (24–97)	12.9	74 (65;82)	37.1 (53.6 to 61.5)	10 (8.4 to 11.6)	
Group 1	3555 (20.9)	44.9 (19–54)	7.2	47 (41;51)	49.5 (22–66)	7.2	51 (46;54)	142.6 (140.9 to 144.2)	n.a.	
Group 2	7367 (43.3)	66.1 (55–74)	5.7	67 (62;71)	69.9 (55–86)	5.7	71 (66;74)	117.7 (116.2 to 119.3)	n.a.	
Group 3	6095 (35.8)	81.3 (75–102)	4.8	81 (77;84)	84.3 (75–103)	5.2	84 (80;88)	79.6 (77.7 to 81.5)	65 (60.9 to 69.1)	
(Group 1: ≤54 years; Group 2: 55–74 years; Group 3: ≥75 years).

* IQR (Q25;Q75).

FIGOInternational Federation of Gynecology and Obstetricsn.a.not applicable

The distribution of patients according to their age group was as follows: Group 1 had 3555 patients (20.9%); Group 2, 7367 (43.3%); and Group 3, 6095 (35.8%) (table 1). Patients in Group 1 were significantly more often diagnosed with a low T-stage disease (79.5% (Group 1) vs 69.2% (Group 2) vs 62.9% (Group 3); p<0.001) and negative lymph nodes (65.1% (Group 1) vs 63.3% (Group 2) vs 59.4% (Group 3); p<0.001) than those in Groups 2 and 3. Therefore, more patients in Group 3 had significantly higher FIGO stages than those in Groups 1 and 2 (FIGO IVB: 4.7% vs 3.5% (Group 2) and 2.3% (Group 1); p<0.001) (figure 1).

Figure 1 Distribution of FIGO stages for women diagnosed with vulvar cancer in Germany between 2004 and 2014 according to age groups. The differences between and within the groups were significant (p<0.001). (Group 1: ≤54 years; Group 2: 55–74 years; Group 3: ≥75 years). FIGO, International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

The risk of distant metastasis was 15.92 (95% CI: 12.17 to 20.94) times higher when lymph nodes were involved than when they were not. However, negative lymph nodes were observed in 13.7% (n=62/454) of patients with metastasis and documented N stage.

Overall and relative survival according to FIGO stage

The 5-year overall survival rate of all patients was 69.5% (95% CI: 68.7% to 70.3%) (figure 2). The overall 5-year survival rate for stage I was 84.3% (95% CI: 83.5% to 85.1%). It was significantly reduced for stages II and III with 65.1% (95% CI: 63.1% to 67.1%; p<0.001) and 51.8% (95% CI: 50.2% to 53.4%; p<0.001), respectively, and further reduced for stages IVA and IVB with 33.2% (95% CI: 30.3% to 36.1%; p<0.001) and 22.2% (95% CI: 18.3% to 26.1%; p<0.001), respectively (figure 2). Stage II patients had an increased risk of death within the first 5 years of disease which was more than twice that of stage I patients (HR: 2.4; 95% CI: 2.3 to 2.6) (figure 2).

Figure 2 Kaplan-Meier survival function and relative survival function with 95% CI for women diagnosed with vulvar cancer in Germany between 2004 and 2014 according to FIGO stage. FIGO, International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

The 5-year relative survival rate decreased with increasing stage (figure 2). The differences between overall and relative survival rates were significant for FIGO I (84.3% vs 91.9%) and FIGO II (65.1% vs 75.6%) (figure 2). The 5-year relative survival rate for stage IVB was worse than the 5-year overall survival rate (21.3% vs 22.2%); however, the difference was not significant (figure 2).

Overall and relative survival according to age group

The 5-year overall survival rate differed significantly among the groups (Group 1 (89.4%) vs Group 2 (74.7%) vs Group 3 (51.3%); p≤0.001) (figure 3). Compared with Group 1, Groups 2 and 3 exhibited an increased mortality risk (HR: 2.62 and 6.05, respectively) (figure 3).

Figure 3 Kaplan-Meier survival function and relative survival function with 95% CI for women diagnosed with vulvar cancer in Germany between 2004 and 2014 according to age group. (Group 1: ≤54 years; Group 2: 55–74 years; Group 3: ≥75 years).

The 5-year relative survival rate showed the same trend as the 5-year overall survival rate; however, it is significantly higher than the 5-year overall survival rate in Groups 2 and 3 (Group 2: 78.1% vs 74.7%; Group 3: 68.0% vs 51.3%) (figure 3). The difference was not significant in Group 1 (89.2% vs 89.4%) (figure 3). The 5-year relative survival rates differed significantly among the three groups (p<0.001) (figure 3).

Mortality according to FIGO stage and age group

The analysis showed that mortality increased with increasing stage and age (figures2 3). However, the increase in mortality risk across the stages was more pronounced in Group 1 (HR 25.3 (95% CI: 17.8 to 36.0) for FIGO IVB) than in Group 3 (HR 5.8 (95% CI: 5.0 to 6.9) for FIGO IVB) (table 2). Across all the FIGO stages and age groups, the mortality rate was highest within the first 3 years (figures2 3).

Table 2 Cox regression of women with vulvar cancer in Germany between 2004 and 2014 for age subgroups by FIGO stage

	Group 1 (≤54 years)	Group 2 (55–74 years)	Group 3 (≥75 years)	
n (%)	HR (95% CI)	p	n (%)	HR (95% CI)	p	n (%)	HR (95% CI)	p	
FIGO I	2.393 (67.3)	reference		4.117 (55.9)	reference		2.902 (47.6)	reference		
FIGO II	317 (8.9)	3.4 (2.5 to 4.6)	<0.001	921 (12.5)	2.5 (2.2 to 2.9)	<0.001	916 (15.0)	1.7 (1.6 to 1.9)	<0.001	
FIGO III	622 (17.5)	5.4 (4.2 to 6.9)	<0.001	1.592 (21.6)	4.3 (3.8 to 4.8)	<0.001	1.520 (25.0)	2.6 (2.4 to 2.8)	<0.001	
FIGO IVA	143 (4.0)	12.2 (9.0 to 16.4)	<0.001	482 (6.5)	7.6 (6.6 to 8.7)	<0.001	471 (7.7)	3.9 (3.5 to 4.4)	<0.001	
FIGO IVB	80 (2.3)	25.3 (17.8 to 36.0)	<0.001	255 (3.5)	12.4 (10.4 to 14.8)	<0.001	286 (4.7)	5.8 (5.0 to 6.9)	<0.001	
(Group 1: ≤54 years; Group 2: 55–74 years; Group 3: ≥75 years).

FIGOInternational Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics

The effects of N-stage and T-stage on survival

The N-stages and T-stages affected survival significantly (p<0.001). This significance remained even after adjusting for other comparisons. HR for N-stage was 1.79 (95% CI: 1.73 to 1.84) whereas that for T-stage was 1.88 (95% CI: 1.80 to 1.96). The higher the T-stages or N-stages, the higher the mortality risk.

Discussion

This study confirmed that the 5-year survival rate of patients with vulvar cancer depends strongly on the stage and age at diagnosis with the survival rate decreasing with increasing stage and age at diagnosis. Older women were significantly more diagnosed with higher stages than younger women. Furthermore, the survival chances, indicated by the HR, decreased more remarkably with advanced stages in younger than in older women. Lymph node status and tumour size, indicated by the T-stage, were further confirmed to be independent factors influencing variables for mortality (p<0.001). Adjusting for each factor did not change the overall results suggesting the robustness of the findings. Positive lymph node status was also a risk factor for metastasis (OR: 15). However, in approximately 14% of patients with metastasis, no positive lymph nodes were observed. Overall, vulvar carcinoma is a disease with good survival chances, partly because it is detected in early stages leading to a 5-year overall survival rate of two-thirds of patients. However, even if the disease is detected in an advanced stage with metastasis, one in five women survive for≥5 years. Mortality risk across all stages and ages was highest within the first 3 years after diagnosis.

The present study revealed that patients in Germany are more often diagnosed at an early stage (localised stage I or II) than at an advanced stage. According to studies from the USA, the Netherlands and Denmark, this distribution is similar in these countries7 8 10 27; however, patients in the USA and the Netherlands are less frequently diagnosed with stages I and II possibly due to differences in screening programmes and healthcare availability.10 27 There is compulsory health insurance for the entire population in Germany and an annual gynaecological screening programme for women whereas a lot of people are without health insurance in the USA.28 29 Early detection of carcinomas depends strongly on the insurance status. For example, a study on hepatocellular carcinoma reported that the frequency of early-stage was significantly higher among patients with insurance than among those without.30 The analysis showed that the survival rates across all stages in Germany are better than those in the USA and Japan.5 11 One possible explanation for this could be the treatment differences. A guideline for the treatment of patients with vulvar cancer was implemented during the study period in Germany; however, it was not established in Japan until 2015 and in the USA until 2016.16 31 32 The introduction of guidelines has led to better outcomes.33 In addition, Germany has better access to healthcare services than the USA as measured by the34 GBD 2019 Healthcare Access and Quality Collaborators by comparing the Healthcare Access and Quality Index of different Countries (87.0 (Germany) vs 80.6 (the USA)).34

In the present study, three age groups were defined and compared according to the 5-year survival rate: Group 1 (≤54 years), Group 2 (55–74 years) and Group 3 (≥75 years). The overall survival rate was expected to decrease with increasing age. However, it was hypothesised that the relative survival rate would not differ too much among the age groups because the age factor is virtually eliminated from relative survival rates. This hypothesis was wrong. The 5-year relative survival rate was lower than the 5-year overall survival rate in Group 1; however, the difference was not significant. In contrast, it was significantly higher than the 5-year overall survival rate in Groups 2 and 3. However, it was significantly worse among older patients than among younger patients (p<0.001) (figure 3). Meltzer-Gunnes et al from Norway compared three age groups according to the 5-year relative survival rate. They defined the groups differently: ≤60, 61–80 and≥81 years; however, they obtained the same result as age influenced the survival rate significantly (p<0.001).9 The data suggest that the survival rate is worse in Norway than in Germany (82.7%, 65.2 % and 44.1% vs 89.2%, 78.1% and 68.0%, respectively). However, due to the differently defined groups, this result remains uncertain. The reason for the differences in survival rates between young and older patients could be the significantly higher FIGO stages in older patients (figure 1). Higher FIGO stages are associated with lower survival rates. In addition, older women are more often untreated, according to the guidelines, due to comorbidity and their age and suffer more often from postoperative wound complications.3537 There are potential explanations for the higher prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-independent cancers with a worse prognosis than HPV-dependent cancers among older women.38 39 However, why older women are more frequently diagnosed with significantly higher stages than younger women remains unclear. Answering this question was not the present study’s aim; however, it has been mentioned that older women are more likely to develop HPV-independent vulvar cancer than younger women.38 Van de Nieuwenhof et al showed that HPV-independent differentiated vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) progresses significantly faster into vulvar cancer than HPV-dependent usual VIN.40 The faster progression is a valid explanation for the higher stages observed in older patients. Furthermore, older women can be assumed to be less aware of changes in their vulva and cancer screening possibilities and have worse access to healthcare.34 41 The greater increase in mortality risk with increasing stage in younger women compared with older women remains unclear (table 2). An explanation may be the better physiological resilience of younger patients which induces better tolerance of the disease and therapy, especially in patients with low stages receiving simple therapy through surgery.42 Notably, more advanced carcinomas require more complex therapy and thereby burden the body in two ways: Through the cancer itself and the therapy. The effect of physiological resilience is minimised. Older patients suffer from frailty and have a higher mortality rate resulting in a flatter increase in mortality risk.43

Tanaka et al observed that the greatest decrease in survival rate in Japan was within the first 5 years after diagnosis.5 This is consistent with the findings of the present study in Germany with the greatest decrease observed within the first 3 years. The difference in the years could be explained by the size of the study cohort as Tanaka et al included 815 patients which was significantly fewer than those included in the present study. Furthermore, differences in lifestyle and predispositions might have led to the observed differences. The outdated and unrevised German guidelines on vulvar cancer recommend a 3-month follow-up interval within the first 3 years after diagnosis, a 6-month interval within the 4th and 5th year and an annual follow-up after that.42 A reasonable recommendation can be made based on the finding that mortality risk was highest within the first 3 years. Furthermore, the guideline recommended staging for metastasis only in patients with higher stages.42 This recommendation was based on the finding that metastasis occurs in 3.8% of patients with less than three affected lymph nodes and in 66% of patients with three or more affected lymph nodes.16 42 In the present study, 13.7% of all stage IVB patients had negative inguinofemoral lymph nodes. Therefore, staging for distant metastases should also be strongly considered in cases of negative inguinofemoral lymph nodes as recommended in the 2023 European Society of Gynaecological Oncology Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Vulvar Cancer.39

Notably, several studies have shown lymph node status to be a prognostic factor for recurrence and survival in women with vulvar cancer.134448 Hami et al reported lymph node positivity as the most important risk factor for recurrence and Kumar et al reported lymph node status and tumour stage as the most important prognostic factors.13 48 These findings are consistent with those of the present study indicating that lymph node positivity is a significant risk factor for mortality (p=0.001) with tumour size (T-stage) also being an independent factor (p<0.001) as shown by the present data and the findings of Sznurkowski et al.46 Both factors are considered together in the FIGO classification making this staging the most reasonable for the most accurate prognosis.

Vulvar cancer is not a common disease. We obtained information on the survival of this disease by evaluating the dataset of the epidemiological cancer registry and studying approximately 17 000 patients with newly diagnosed invasive vulvar cancer over approximately 13 years. To our knowledge, the present study is the first presentation of structured data on the survival of a large cohort of women with vulvar cancer in Germany. Representative analyses can be derived from this. However, the present study had some limitations. First, the large study cohort could have led to statistical significance without clinical significance; however, this problem was addressed by analysing subgroups rather than the whole cohort. Second, as is typical for a registry study, only available information could be analysed; therefore, subsequent data collection was impossible. This resulted in the loss of approximately 10 000 diagnosed cases in this study owing to incomplete documentation. Nevertheless, the remaining cases were sufficient to obtain solid results. Third, HPV status as a risk factor, resection margin or recurrence rate are important and interesting factors that could not be investigated using the available data. Finally, the impact of applied therapy on the probability of survival could not be meaningfully assessed, although this would certainly be of great interest. These aspects remain to be investigated in future studies. As mentioned previously, every woman aged ≥20 years in Germany undergoes a gynecological check-up. They visit the gynaecologist once a year to have their vulva, vagina and cervix inspected and to undergo a Pap smear test on the cervix.28 This screening is assumed to play an important role in the increased rate of early detection of vulvar carcinomas in Germany and, therefore, could be a good recommendation for other countries.

In conclusion, this study revealed the significant impact of stage and age as prognostic factors on the survival of patients with vulvar cancer. Older women had a worse survival chance than younger women. In addition, older women were more often diagnosed at advanced stages. Tumour size and lymph node status were proven to be independent risk factors for mortality. Early detection, with concomitant small spread of the tumour and tumour-free lymph nodes, is the main controllable factor for the survival prognosis of the disease. Furthermore, we found that the greatest decrease in survival rate was within the first 3 years and staging for metastasis should always be considered, even if the lymph nodes are cancer-free.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the registration team of the German Centre for Cancer Registry Data at the Robert Koch Institute.

Data availability statement

Data may be obtained from a third party and are not publicly available.

Review Process File
28 08 2024

Funding: The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Data availability free text: The data used in this study are pseudonymised data from the German cancer registry and may be obtained from the German Centre for Cancer Registry Data at Robert Koch Institute (krebsdaten@rki.de). They are not publicly available. The reuse is permitted for evaluation and publication of the survival data.

Patient consent for publication: Not applicable.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Patient and public involvement: Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

Presented at: The content of this study has been presented at the 63rd Congress of the German Society for Gynaecology and Obstetrics 2020 in Munich, Germany.

Ethics approval: The study and its design were presented to the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, on 8 June 2020. As this is a purely retrospective study and access to the personal, pseudonymised data from the Robert Koch Institute was obtained legally, the Ethics Committee saw no need for consultation and had no objections to the study.

Prepub: Prepublication history for this paper is available online. To view these files, please visit the journal online (https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077960).
==== Refs
References

1 Robert Koch Institute and Association of Population-Based Cancer Registries in Germany German Centre for Cancer Registry Data, Cancer in Germany 2015/2016. 12th Edition, Vol 17 2020 82 4
2 de Sanjosé S Alemany L Ordi J et al Worldwide human papillomavirus genotype attribution in over 2000 cases of intraepithelial and invasive lesions of the vulva Eur J Cancer 2013 49 3450 61 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.06.033 23886586
3 Barlow EL Kang Y-J Hacker NF et al Changing Trends in Vulvar Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates in Australia Since 1982 Int J Gynecol Cancer 2015 25 1683 9 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000547 26495761
4 Holleczek B Sehouli J Barinoff J Vulvar cancer in Germany: increase in incidence and change in tumour biological characteristics from 1974 to 2013 Acta Oncol 2018 57 324 30 10.1080/0284186X.2017.1360513 28799431
5 Tanaka Y Ueda Y Kakuda M et al Trends in incidence and long-term survival of Japanese women with vulvar cancer: a population-based analysis Int J Clin Oncol 2019 24 1137 42 10.1007/s10147-019-01453-7 31025128
6 Van Dyne EA Henley SJ Saraiya M et al Trends in Human Papillomavirus-Associated Cancers - United States, 1999-2015 MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018 67 918 24 10.15585/mmwr.mm6733a2 30138307
7 Rasmussen CL Thomsen LT Aalborg GL et al Incidence of vulvar high-grade precancerous lesions and cancer in Denmark before and after introduction of HPV vaccination Gynecol Oncol 2020 157 664 70 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.03.030 32276790
8 Baandrup L Varbo A Munk C et al In situ and invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva in Denmark 1978-2007-a nationwide population-based study Gynecol Oncol 2011 122 45 9 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.03.016 21474166
9 Meltzer-Gunnes CJ Småstuen MC Kristensen GB et al Vulvar carcinoma in Norway: A 50-year perspective on trends in incidence, treatment and survival Gynecol Oncol 2017 145 543 8 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.03.008 28356187
10 SEER Cancer stat facts: vulvar cancer Bethesda (MD) National Cancer Institute Available https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/vulva.html accessed 19-Mar-2023
11 Olawaiye AB Cotler J Cuello MA et al FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva: 2021 revision Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2021 155 43 7 10.1002/ijgo.13880 34520062
12 Beller U Quinn MA Benedet JL et al Carcinoma of the Vulva Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2006 95 Suppl 1 S7 27 10.1016/S0020-7292(06)60028-3
13 Hami LT Lampe B Mallmann P et al The Impact of Age on the Prognosis of Vulvar Cancer Oncol Res Treat 2018 41 520 4 10.1159/000488800 30041246
14 Prieske K Woelber L Muallem MZ et al Age, treatment and prognosis of patients with squamous cell vulvar cancer (VSCC) - analysis of the AGO-CaRE-1 study Gynecol Oncol 2021 161 442 8 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.02.025 33648748
15 Haag P Hanhart N Müller M Gynecology and Urology for Study and Practice, 8th Ed Breisach Medizinische Verlags- und Informationsdienste 2016 43 5
16 Hampl M Schnürch HG Ackermann S et al Diagnosis, therapy, and follow-up care of vulvar cancer and its precursors (national guideline S2k-level), AWMF registry no.015/059 Berlin 2015 Available http://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/015-059.html
17 German Centre for Cancer Registry Data Epidemiological and clinical cancer registries – what are the differences? Berlin Robert-Koch-Institute 2019 Available https://www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/DE/Content/Publikationen/Kurzbeitraege/Archiv_vor2017/unterschiede_epi_klin_reg.html accessed 01-Dec-2021
18 Wittekind C Asamura H Sobin LH TNM-Atlas: An Illustrated Guide to the TNM/pTNM-Classification of Malignant Tumors. 6th Ed Weinheim Wiley VCH Verlag GmbH 2015 253
19 Wittekind C Klimpfinger M Sobin L TNM-Atlas: Illustrated Guide to the TNM/pTNM-Classification of Malignant Tumors. 5th Ed Heidelberg Springer 2004 227 31
20 Pecorelli S Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009 105 103 4 10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.02.012 19367689
21 Holleczek B Gondos A Brenner H periodR - an R package to calculate long-term cancer survival estimates using period analysis Methods Inf Med 2009 48 123 8 10.3414/ME0563 19283308
22 Ederer F Heise H Instructions to IBM 650 programmers in processing survival computations: methodological note 1959
23 IBM Corp IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 25.0 Armonk, NY IBM Corp 2017
24 R Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing Vienna, Austria R Foundation for Statistical Computing 2018 Available https://www.R-project.org
25 Van G Drake FL Python 3 Reference Manual Scotts Valley, CA CreateSpace 2009
26 Hunter JD Matplotlib: A 2D Graphics Environment Comput Sci Eng 2007 9 90 5 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55
27 Schuurman MS van den Einden LCG Massuger L et al Trends in incidence and survival of Dutch women with vulvar squamous cell carcinoma Eur J Cancer 2013 49 3872 80 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.08.003 24011936
28 Federal Joint Committee Cervical cancer screening for women between 20 and 34 years - information about the offer of the statutory health insurance 2022 20 Available https://www.g-ba.de/downloads/17-98-4865/2022-11-17_G-BA_Versicherteninformation_Gebaermutterhalskrebsscreening_Frauen_20-34_bf.pdf
29 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Vital signs: health insurance coverage and health care utilization --- United States, 2006--2009 and January-March 2010 MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2010 59 1448 54 21063276
30 Wang J Ha J Lopez A et al Medicaid and Uninsured Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Have More Advanced Tumor Stage and Are Less Likely to Receive Treatment J Clin Gastroenterol 2018 52 437 43 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000859 28723861
31 Greer BE Koh WJ New NCCN Guidelines for Vulvar Cancer J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2016 14 656 8 10.6004/jnccn.2016.0184 27226506
32 Saito T Tabata T Ikushima H et al Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines 2015 for the treatment of vulvar cancer and vaginal cancer Int J Clin Oncol 2018 23 201 34 10.1007/s10147-017-1193-z 29159773
33 Grimshaw JM Russell IT Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluations Lancet 1993 342 1317 22 10.1016/0140-6736(93)92244-n 7901634
34 GBD 2019 Healthcare Access and Quality Collaborators Assessing performance of the Healthcare Access and Quality Index, overall and by select age groups, for 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 Lancet Glob Health 2022 10 e1715 43 10.1016/S2214-109X(22)00429-6 36209761
35 Rahm C Adok C Dahm-Kähler P et al Complications and risk factors in vulvar cancer surgery - A population-based study Eur J Surg Oncol 2022 48 1400 6 10.1016/j.ejso.2022.02.006 35148915
36 Wills A Obermair A A review of complications associated with the surgical treatment of vulvar cancer Gynecol Oncol 2013 131 467 79 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.07.082 23863358
37 Craigs CL Bennett MI Hurlow A et al Older age is associated with less cancer treatment: a longitudinal study of English cancer patients Age Ageing 2018 47 833 40 10.1093/ageing/afy094 29982340
38 Meltzer-Gunnes CJ Lie AK Jonassen CGM et al Time trends in human papillomavirus prevalence and genotype distribution in vulvar carcinoma in Norway Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2024 103 153 64 10.1111/aogs.14702 37904590
39 Oonk MHM Planchamp F Baldwin P et al European Society of Gynaecological Oncology Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Vulvar Cancer - Update 2023 Int J Gynecol Cancer 2023 33 1023 43 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004486 37369376
40 van de Nieuwenhof HP Massuger LFAG van der Avoort IAM et al Vulvar squamous cell carcinoma development after diagnosis of VIN increases with age Eur J Cancer 2009 45 851 6 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.11.037 19117749
41 Siahpush M Singh GK Sociodemographic predictors of pap test receipt, currency and knowledge among Australian women Prev Med 2002 35 362 8 10.1006/pmed.2002.1086 12453713
42 Schnürch HG Ackermann S Alt CD et al Diagnosis, Therapy and Follow-up Care of Vulvar Cancer and its Precursors. Guideline of the DGGG and DKG (S2k-Level, AWMF Registry Number 015/059, November 2015 Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2016 76 1035 49 10.1055/s-0042-103728 27765958
43 Clegg A Young J Iliffe S et al Frailty in elderly people Lancet 2013 381 752 62 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62167-9 23395245
44 Woelber L Eulenburg C Choschzick M et al Prognostic role of lymph node metastases in vulvar cancer and implications for adjuvant treatment Int J Gynecol Cancer 2012 22 503 8 10.1097/IGC.0b013e31823eed4c 22266935
45 Miljanović-Špika I Madunić MD Topolovec Z et al Prognostic Factors for Vulvar Cancer Acta Clin Croat 2021 60 25 32 10.20471/acc.2021.60.01.04
46 Sznurkowski JJ Milczek T Emerich J Prognostic factors and a value of 2009 FIGO staging system in vulvar cancer Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013 287 1211 8 10.1007/s00404-012-2683-x 23263173
47 Zapardiel I Iacoponi S Coronado PJ et al Prognostic factors in patients with vulvar cancer: the VULCAN study Int J Gynecol Cancer 2020 30 1285 91 10.1136/ijgc-2019-000526 32571891
48 Kumar N Ray MD Sharma DN et al Vulvar cancer: surgical management and survival trends in a low resource setting J Egypt Natl Canc Inst 2020 32 4 10.1186/s43046-019-0015-y 32372283
