Lymphatic Mapping and Sentinel Node Biopsy in High-Grade Uterine Cancers

Translating biological insights into improved management of endometrial cancer

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecological cancer among women in high-income countries, with both incidence and mortality continuing to increase. The complexity of the management of patients with EC has evolved with greater comprehension of the underlying biology and heterogeneity of this disease. With a growing number of novel therapeutic agents available, emerging treatment regimens seem to have the potential to help to address the concerning trends in EC-related mortality. In this Review, we describe the epidemiology, histopathology and molecular classification of EC as well as the role of the new (2023) International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging model. Furthermore, we provide an overview of disease management in the first-line and recurrent disease settings. With increasing use of molecular profiling and updates in treatment paradigms, we also summarize new developments in this rapidly changing treatment landscape.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer: When, how and in which patients

The role of nodal dissection in patients with endometrial cancer has been intensively studied in several studies. Historically, systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy represented the gold standard surgical treatment to assess potential nodal involvement and consequently define the appropriate stage of the tumor. Over the last years, sentinel node biopsy (SLNB) has been introduced as a more targeted alternative to lymph node dissection for lymph node staging and it has become popular among gynecologic oncologists. However, no level A evidence is still available, and several features of the SLNB technique have been matter of discussion among clinicians and a universally accepted methodology is still not currently available. This narrative review aims to summarize the body of knowledge on SLNB to offer the reader a complete picture about the evolution of this technique over the last decades.

The Sentinel Lymph Node in Treatment Planning: A Narrative Review of Lymph-Flow-Guided Radiotherapy

The sentinel lymph node technique is minimally invasive and used routinely by surgeons, reducing the need for morbid extensive lymph node dissections, which is a significant advantage for cancer staging and treatment decisions. The sentinel lymph node could also help radiation oncologists to identify tumor drainage for each of their patients, leading to a more personalized radiotherapy, instead of a probabilistic irradiation based on delineation atlases. The aim is both to avoid recurrence in unexpected areas and to limit the volume of irradiated healthy tissues. The aim of our study is to evaluate the impact of sentinel lymph node mapping for radiation oncologists. This concept, relying on sentinel lymph node mapping for treatment planning, is known as lymph-flow-guided radiotherapy. We present an up-to-date narrative literature review showing the potential applications of the sentinel lymph node technique for radiotherapy, as well as the limits that need to be addressed before its routine usage.

The Risk of Recurrence in Endometrial Cancer Patients with Low-Volume Metastasis in the Sentinel Lymph Nodes: A Retrospective Multi-Institutional Study

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of low-volume metastasis (LVM) on disease-free survival (DFS) in women with apparent early-stage endometrial cancer (EC) who underwent sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping. Patients with pre-operative early-stage EC were retrospectively collected from an international collaboration including 13 referring institutions. A total of 1428 patients were included in this analysis. One hundred and eighty-six patients (13%) had lymph node involvement. Fifty-nine percent of positive SLN exhibited micrometastases, 26.9% micrometastases, and 14% isolated tumor cells. Seventeen patients with positive lymph nodes did not receive any adjuvant therapy. At a median follow-up of 33.3 months, the disease had recurred in 114 women (8%). Patients with micrometastases in the lymph nodes had a worse prognosis of disease-free survival compared to patients with negative nodes or LVM. The rate of recurrence was significantly higher for women with micrometastases than those with low-volume metastases (HR = 2.61; p = 0.01). The administration of adjuvant treatment in patients with LVM, without uterine risk factors, remains a matter of debate and requires further evaluation.

Analysis of prognostic factors of metastatic endometrial cancer based on surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database

Objective

To explore the risk factors for survival and prognosis of patients with metastatic endometrial cancer and to build and verify a reliable prediction model.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed patients diagnosed with metastatic endometrial cancer in the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between January 2010 and December 2015. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to assess clinical variables impact on survival and to construct nomograms. The results of the consistency index (C-index), subject operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and calibration curve were used to evaluate the predictive ability of the nomogram.

Results

This study included 3,878 patients with metastatic endometrial cancer. In the univariate analysis, variables associated with overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) included age, race, marital status, pathological type, pathological grade, T-stage, N-stage, surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, bone metastasis, brain metastasis, liver metastasis, and lung metastasis. In the multivariate analysis, age, race, pathological type, pathological grade, T-stage, N-stage, surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, brain metastasis, liver metastasis, and lung metastasis were independent risk factors for OS and CSS (all P < 0.05). Combined with the results of the multiple factors, the 1-, 3-, 5-, and 8-year nomograms were constructed. For OS and CSS, T-stage had the greatest impact on the adverse prognosis of patients with metastatic endometrial cancer. The C-indexes of the OS and CSS nomograms in the training cohort were 0.749 (95% CI, 0.739-0.760) and 0.746 (95% CI, 0.736-0.756), respectively. The C-indices of OS and CSS in the validation cohort were 0.730 (95% CI, 0.714-0.746) and 0.728 (95% CI, 0.712-0.744), respectively. The ROC curve revealed our model's good prediction accuracy and clinical practicability. The calibration curve also confirmed the consistency between the model and actual existence. The Kaplan-Meier curves revealed statistically significant differences between the risk subgroups (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Our SEER-based nomograms for predicting survival in patients with metastatic endometrial cancer were helpful for the clinical evaluation of patient prognosis.