1
|
Cucinella G, Schivardi G, Zhou XC, AlHilli M, Wallace S, Wohlmuth C, Baiocchi G, Tokgozoglu N, Raspagliesi F, Buda A, Zanagnolo V, Zapardiel I, Jagasia N, Giuntoli R, Glickman A, Peiretti M, Lanner M, Chacon E, Di Guilmi J, Pereira A, Laas-Faron E, Fishman A, Nitschmann CC, Kurnit K, Moriarty K, Joehlin-Price A, Lees B, Covens A, De Brot L, Taskiran C, Bogani G, Landoni F, Grassi T, Paniga C, Multinu F, De Vitis LA, Hernández A, Mastroyannis S, Ghoniem K, Chiantera V, Shahi M, Fought AJ, McGree M, Mariani A, Glaser G. Prognostic value of isolated tumor cells in sentinel lymph nodes in low risk endometrial cancer: results from an international multi-institutional study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2024; 34:179-187. [PMID: 38088182 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2023-005032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/22/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The prognostic significance of isolated tumor cells (≤0.2 mm) in sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) of endometrial cancer patients is still unclear. Our aim was to assess the prognostic value of isolated tumor cells in patients with low risk endometrial cancer who underwent SLN biopsy and did not receive adjuvant therapy. Outcomes were compared with node negative patients. METHODS Patients with SLNs-isolated tumor cells between 2013 and 2019 were identified from 15 centers worldwide, while SLN negative patients were identified from Mayo Clinic, Rochester, between 2013 and 2018. Only low risk patients (stage IA, endometrioid histology, grade 1 or 2) who did not receive any adjuvant therapy were included. Primary outcomes were recurrence free, non-vaginal recurrence free, and overall survival, evaluated with Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS 494 patients (42 isolated tumor cells and 452 node negative) were included. There were 21 (4.3%) recurrences (5 SLNs-isolated tumor cells, 16 node negative); recurrence was vaginal in six patients (1 isolated tumor cells, 5 node negative), and non-vaginal in 15 (4 isolated tumor cells, 11 node negative). Median follow-up among those without recurrence was 2.3 years (interquartile range (IQR) 1.1-3.0) and 2.6 years (IQR 0.6-4.2) in the SLN-isolated tumor cell and node negative patients, respectively. The presence of SLNs-isolated tumor cells, lymphovascular space invasion, and International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) grade 2 were significant risk factors for recurrence on univariate analysis. SLN-isolated tumor cell patients had worse recurrence free survival (p<0.01) and non-vaginal recurrence free survival (p<0.01) compared with node negative patients. Similar results were observed in the subgroup of patients without lymphovascular space invasion (n=480). There was no difference in overall survival between the two cohorts in the full sample and the subset excluding patients with lymphovascular space invasion. CONCLUSIONS Patients with SLNs-isolated tumor cells and low risk profile, without adjuvant therapy, had a significantly worse recurrence free survival compared with node negative patients with similar risk factors, after adjusting for grade and excluding patients with lymphovascular space invasion. However, the presence of SLNs-isolated tumor cells was not associated with worse overall survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuseppe Cucinella
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Surgical, Oncological, and Oral Sciences (DiChirOnS), University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - Gabriella Schivardi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Gynecology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milano, Italy
| | | | | | - Sumer Wallace
- University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Christoph Wohlmuth
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria
| | - Glauco Baiocchi
- Gynecologic Oncology, AC Camargo Cancer Center, Sao Paulo, Brazil
| | - Nedim Tokgozoglu
- Obstetrics and Gynecology, Turkish Society of Gynecologic Oncology, Istanbul, Turkey
| | | | - Alessandro Buda
- University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza, Italy
- Ospedale Michele e Pietro Ferrero, Verduno, Italy
| | - Vanna Zanagnolo
- Department of Gynecology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milano, Italy
| | | | - Nisha Jagasia
- Queensland Centre for Gynaecological Cancer, Herston, Queensland, Australia
- Mater Adult Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Robert Giuntoli
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Ariel Glickman
- Gynaecologic Oncology Unit, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Maximilian Lanner
- Department of Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Steiermark, Austria
| | - Enrique Chacon
- Gynecologic Oncology, Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain
| | - Julian Di Guilmi
- Gyn Onc, Hospital Britanico de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Federal District, Argentina
| | - Augusto Pereira
- Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda, Majadahonda, Comunidad de Madrid, Spain
| | - Enora Laas-Faron
- Chirurgie Senologique, Gynécologique et Reconstructrice, Curie Institute Hospital Group, Paris, France
| | - Ami Fishman
- Obstetrics and Gynecology, Meir Medical Center, Kfar-Saba, Israel
| | | | - Katherine Kurnit
- Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago Biological Sciences Division, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Kristen Moriarty
- Hartford HealthCare, Hartford, Connecticut, USA
- Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Program, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA
| | | | - Brittany Lees
- University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Allan Covens
- University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Louise De Brot
- Gynecologic Oncology, AC Camargo Cancer Center, Sao Paulo, Brazil
| | - Cagatay Taskiran
- Turkish Society of Gynecologic Oncology, Istanbul, Turkey
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Koc University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Giorgio Bogani
- Foundation IRCCS National Cancer Institute, Milano, Italy
| | - Fabio Landoni
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, University of Milan-Bicocca Department of Medicine and Surgery, Monza, Lombardia, Italy
| | - Tommaso Grassi
- San Gerardo Hospital; University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza, Italy
| | | | - Francesco Multinu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
- Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy
| | - Luigi Antonio De Vitis
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
- Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy
| | - Alicia Hernández
- Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Khaled Ghoniem
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Vito Chiantera
- Department of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (PROMISE), University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - Maryam Shahi
- Department of Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Angela J Fought
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Michaela McGree
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Andrea Mariani
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Gretchen Glaser
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Cabrera S, Gómez-Hidalgo NR, García-Pineda V, Bebia V, Fernández-González S, Alonso P, Rodríguez-Gómez T, Fusté P, Gracia-Segovia M, Lorenzo C, Chacon E, Roldan Rivas F, Arencibia O, Martí Edo M, Fidalgo S, Sanchis J, Padilla-Iserte P, Pantoja-Garrido M, Martínez S, Peiró R, Escayola C, Oliver-Pérez MR, Aghababyan C, Tauste C, Morales S, Torrent A, Utrilla-Layna J, Fargas F, Calvo A, Aller de Pace L, Gil-Moreno A. Accuracy and Survival Outcomes after National Implementation of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Early Stage Endometrial Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:7653-7662. [PMID: 37633852 PMCID: PMC10562309 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-14065-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2023] [Accepted: 06/23/2023] [Indexed: 08/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has recently been accepted to evaluate nodal status in endometrial cancer at early stage, which is key to tailoring adjuvant treatments. Our aim was to evaluate the national implementation of SLN biopsy in terms of accuracy to detect nodal disease in a clinical setting and oncologic outcomes according to the volume of nodal disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 29 Spanish centers participated in this retrospective, multicenter registry including patients with endometrial adenocarcinoma at preoperative early stage who had undergone SLN biopsy between 2015 and 2021. Each center collected data regarding demographic, clinical, histologic, therapeutic, and survival characteristics. RESULTS A total of 892 patients were enrolled. After the surgery, 12.9% were suprastaged to FIGO 2009 stages III-IV and 108 patients (12.1%) had nodal involvement: 54.6% macrometastasis, 22.2% micrometastases, and 23.1% isolated tumor cells (ITC). Sensitivity of SLN biopsy was 93.7% and false negative rate was 6.2%. After a median follow up of 1.81 years, overall surivial and disease-free survival were significantly lower in patients who had macrometastases when compared with patients with negative nodes, micrometastases or ITC. CONCLUSIONS In our nationwide cohort we obtained high sensitivity of SLN biopsy to detect nodal disease. The oncologic outcomes of patients with negative nodes and low-volume disease were similar after tailoring adjuvant treatments. In total, 22% of patients with macrometastasis and 50% of patients with micrometastasis were at low risk of nodal metastasis according to their preoperative risk factors, revealing the importance of SLN biopsy in the surgical management of patients with early stage EC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silvia Cabrera
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Natalia R Gómez-Hidalgo
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Vicente Bebia
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Paula Alonso
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
| | - Tomás Rodríguez-Gómez
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Virgen de la Victoria, Málaga, Spain
| | - Pere Fusté
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Hospital Clínic i Provincial de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Cristina Lorenzo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitario Nuestra Señora de Candelaria, Tenerife, Spain
| | - Enrique Chacon
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - Fernando Roldan Rivas
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain
| | - Octavio Arencibia
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitario Gran Canarias Dr. Negrín, Las Palmas, Spain
| | - Marina Martí Edo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital General Universitario de Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, Spain
| | - Soledad Fidalgo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias, Oviedo, Spain
| | - Josep Sanchis
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Instituto Valenciano de Oncologia (IVO), Valencia, Spain
| | - Pablo Padilla-Iserte
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Hospital Politécnico Universitario La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Manuel Pantoja-Garrido
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Sevilla, Spain
| | - Sergio Martínez
- Department of Gynecology, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain
| | - Ricard Peiró
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital General de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Cecilia Escayola
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, El Pilar Quiron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - M Reyes Oliver-Pérez
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, 12 de Octubre Research Institute (i+12), Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Cristina Aghababyan
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Carmen Tauste
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitario de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - Sara Morales
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Infanta Leonor, Madrid, Spain
| | - Anna Torrent
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
| | - Jesus Utrilla-Layna
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Fundación Jimenez Diaz, Madrid, Spain
| | - Francesc Fargas
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitari Quirón Dexeus, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ana Calvo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitari Arnau de Vilanova, Lleida, Spain
| | - Laura Aller de Pace
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain
| | - Antonio Gil-Moreno
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Capozzi VA, Scarpelli E, Berretta R. Response to: Correspondence on 'Long-term survival outcomes in high-risk endometrial cancer patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy alone versus lymphadenectomy' by Buda et al. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2023; 33:1670-1671. [PMID: 37666524 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004890] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/06/2023] Open
|
4
|
Ah-Thiane L, Rousseau C, Aumont M, Cailleteau A, Doré M, Mervoyer A, Vaugier L, Supiot S. The Sentinel Lymph Node in Treatment Planning: A Narrative Review of Lymph-Flow-Guided Radiotherapy. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:2736. [PMID: 37345071 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15102736] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2023] [Revised: 05/09/2023] [Accepted: 05/11/2023] [Indexed: 06/23/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Loic Ah-Thiane
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO René Gauducheau, Boulevard Jacques Monod, 44800 St-Herblain, France
| | - Caroline Rousseau
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, ICO René Gauducheau, Boulevard Jacques Monod, 44800 St-Herblain, France
- CRCI2NA, UMR 1307 Inserm-UMR 6075 CNRS, Nantes University, 44000 Nantes, France
| | - Maud Aumont
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO René Gauducheau, Boulevard Jacques Monod, 44800 St-Herblain, France
| | - Axel Cailleteau
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO René Gauducheau, Boulevard Jacques Monod, 44800 St-Herblain, France
| | - Mélanie Doré
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO René Gauducheau, Boulevard Jacques Monod, 44800 St-Herblain, France
| | - Augustin Mervoyer
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO René Gauducheau, Boulevard Jacques Monod, 44800 St-Herblain, France
| | - Loig Vaugier
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO René Gauducheau, Boulevard Jacques Monod, 44800 St-Herblain, France
| | - Stéphane Supiot
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO René Gauducheau, Boulevard Jacques Monod, 44800 St-Herblain, France
- CRCI2NA, Inserm UMR 1232, CNRS ERL 6001, Nantes University, 44000 Nantes, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Cuccu I, D’Oria O, Sgamba L, De Angelis E, Golia D’Augè T, Turetta C, Di Dio C, Scudo M, Bogani G, Di Donato V, Palaia I, Perniola G, Tomao F, Muzii L, Giannini A. Role of Genomic and Molecular Biology in the Modulation of the Treatment of Endometrial Cancer: Narrative Review and Perspectives. Healthcare (Basel) 2023; 11:healthcare11040571. [PMID: 36833105 PMCID: PMC9957190 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11040571] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 35.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2023] [Revised: 02/11/2023] [Accepted: 02/13/2023] [Indexed: 02/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Endometrial cancer (EC) is one of the most common gynecological malignancies in Western countries. Traditionally, loco-reginal dissemination and histological characteristics are the main prognostic factors. Nowadays, molecular and genomic profiling showed exciting results in terms of prognostication. According to the data provided by The Cancer Genome Atlas and other studies, molecular and genomic profiling might be useful in identifying patients al low, intermediate, and high risk of recurrence. However, data regarding the therapeutic value are scant. Several prospective studies are ongoing to identify the most appropriate adjuvant strategy in EC patients, especially for those with positive nodes and low volume disease. The molecular classification has offered the possibility to improve the risk stratification and management of EC. The aim of this review is to focus on the evolution of molecular classification in EC and its impact on the research approach and on clinical management. Molecular and genomic profiling might be useful to tailor the most appropriate adjuvant strategies in apparent early-stage EC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilaria Cuccu
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Ottavia D’Oria
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Translational Medicine and Oncology, Sapienza University, 00161 Rome, Italy
- Correspondence:
| | - Ludovica Sgamba
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Emanuele De Angelis
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Tullio Golia D’Augè
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Camilla Turetta
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Camilla Di Dio
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Maria Scudo
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Giorgio Bogani
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy
| | - Violante Di Donato
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Innocenza Palaia
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Giorgia Perniola
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Tomao
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Ludovico Muzii
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Giannini
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bogani G, Di Donato V, Papadia A, Buda A, Casarin J, Multinu F, Plotti F, Cuccu I, D'Auge TG, Gasparri ML, Pinelli C, Perrone AM, Barra F, Sorbi F, Cromi A, Di Martino G, Palaia I, Perniola G, Ferrero S, De Iaco P, Perrone C, Angioli R, Luvero D, Muzii L, Ghezzi F, Landoni F, Mueller MD, Benedetti Panici P, Raspagliesi F. Evaluating long-term outcomes of three approaches to retroperitoneal staging in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 166:277-283. [PMID: 35725656 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2022] [Revised: 06/06/2022] [Accepted: 06/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Sentinel lymph node mapping (SNM) has gained popularity in managing apparent early-stage endometrial cancer (EC). Here, we evaluated the long-term survival of three different approaches of nodal assessment. METHODS This is a multi-institutional retrospective study evaluating long-term outcomes of EC patients having nodal assessment between 01/01/2006 and 12/31/2016. In order to reduce possible confounding factors, we applied a propensity-matched algorithm. RESULTS Overall, 940 patients meeting inclusion criteria were included in the study, of which 174 (18.5%), 187 (19.9%), and 579 (61.6%) underwent SNM, SNM followed by backup lymphadenectomy (LND) and LND alone, respectively. Applying a propensity score matching algorithm (1:1:2) we selected 500 patients, including 125 SNM, 125 SNM/backup LND, and 250 LND. Baseline characteristics of the study population were similar between groups. The prevalence of nodal disease was 14%, 16%, and 12% in patients having SNM, SNM/backup LND and LND, respectively. Overall, 19 (7.6%) patients were diagnosed with low volume nodal disease. The survival analysis comparing the three techniques did not show statistical differences in terms of disease-free (p = 0.750) and overall survival (p = 0.899). Similarly, the type of nodal assessment did not impact survival outcomes after stratification based on uterine risk factors. CONCLUSION Our study highlighted that SNM provides similar long-term oncologic outcomes than LND.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giorgio Bogani
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy.
| | - Violante Di Donato
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Papadia
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, University' of Italian Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Alessandro Buda
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Michele e Pietro Ferrero Hospital, 12060 Verduno, Italy
| | - Jvan Casarin
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Filippo Del Ponte' Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Francesco Multinu
- Division of Gynecologic Surgery, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Plotti
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Campus Biomedico of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Ilaria Cuccu
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Tullio Golia D'Auge
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Maria Luisa Gasparri
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, University' of Italian Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Ciro Pinelli
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Filippo Del Ponte' Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Anna Myriam Perrone
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sant'Orsola Malpighi University, Hospital University of Bologna, 40138 Bologna, Italy
| | - Fabio Barra
- Academic Unit of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy; Department of Neurosciences, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health (DiNOGMI), University of Genova, Italy
| | - Flavia Sorbi
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Antonella Cromi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Filippo Del Ponte' Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Giampaolo Di Martino
- Gynecology Oncology Surgical Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Gerardo Hospital, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy
| | - Innocenza Palaia
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Giorgia Perniola
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Simone Ferrero
- Academic Unit of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy; Department of Neurosciences, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health (DiNOGMI), University of Genova, Italy
| | - Pierandrea De Iaco
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sant'Orsola Malpighi University, Hospital University of Bologna, 40138 Bologna, Italy
| | - Chiara Perrone
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Angioli
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Campus Biomedico of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Daniela Luvero
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Campus Biomedico of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Ludovico Muzii
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Fabio Ghezzi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Filippo Del Ponte' Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Fabio Landoni
- Gynecology Oncology Surgical Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Gerardo Hospital, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy
| | - Michael D Mueller
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital of Bern and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | | | - Francesco Raspagliesi
- Gynecological Oncology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|