Multicenter study comparing oncologic outcomes after lymph node assessment via a sentinel lymph node algorithm versus comprehensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in patients with serous and clear cell endometrial carcinoma

Laparoscopic treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer: benefits of sentinel lymph node mapping and impact on lower extremity lymphedema

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the lymphatic-specific morbidity (specifically, lower extremity lymphedema) associated with laparoscopic management of early-stage endometrial cancer using the sentinel lymph node (SLN) algorithm by type of actual nodal assessment.

METHODS

An ambispective study was conducted on consecutive patients surgically treated for apparent early-stage endometrial cancer who underwent laparoscopic staging according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network SLN algorithm at a single institution from January 2020 to August 2023. Data on patient characteristics, surgical details, and post-operative complications were collected. Lymphedema screening was performed using a validated questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 239 patients were analyzed, with a questionnaire response rate of 85.4%. The study population was grouped based on actual surgical staging: hysterectomy+SLN (54.8%), hysterectomy+systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy (27.2%), and hysterectomy only (18%). The prevalence of lymphedema was significantly lower in the hysterectomy+SLN group compared with the hysterectomy+systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy group (21.4% vs 44.6%, p=0.003). Multivariable analysis showed a threefold increase in the risk of lymphedema for the hysterectomy+systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy group compared with the hysterectomy+SLN group: OR 3.11 (95% CI 1.47 to 6.58). No significant associations were found between lymphedema and other patient or tumor characteristics.

CONCLUSION

In the setting of a laparoscopic approach for early-stage endometrial cancer surgery, SLN mapping is associated with a significant reduction in lymphatic complications compared with a systematic lymph node dissection. Our findings provide additional evidence endorsing the adoption of SLN mapping during minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer. This technique ensures comparable diagnostic accuracy and also minimizes complications.

Implementation of sentinel node biopsy in high-risk endometrial cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy and sentinel lymphnode biopsy is accepted as a valid alternative to lymphadenectomy for staging purposes. Recently, sentinel node biopsy has been also extended to high-risk disease where risk of nodal involvement is higher.

RECENT FINDINGS

Our review focuses on the definition of high-risk disease and how there are different concepts of high-risk in the scientific community. While the sensitivity of sentinel node biopsy has been established and accepted in lower risk endometrial cancers, only in recent years retrospective and prospective evidence has been published. Ultrastaging allows to identify more nodal disease that would normally be overlooked by traditional staging, allowing proper adjuvant therapy to be administered. The longstanding question of whether lymphadenectomy in high-risk settings is a therapeutic or a staging procedure remains open. Retrospective data, however, show that oncologic outcomes are not compromised by sentinel node biopsy.

SUMMARY

Sentinel node biopsy is a valid alternative to traditional, more extensive nodal staging: with the addition of ultrastaging, it has more sensitivity than lymphadenectomy with less surgical morbidity. Ongoing trials will definitively establish if oncological outcomes are affected by sentinel node biopsy, but retrospective data are encouraging.

Nodal staging in high and high-intermediate risk endometrial cancer surgery: Which role in the molecular classification era?

OBJECTIVES

Nodal staging contributes to risk group definition and the indication to adjuvant treatment in endometrial cancer (EC) patients. However, the role of nodal assessment evolved and requires redefinition. Primary outcome of the study was to assess the impact of surgical nodal staging in defining high-risk (HR) EC. Secondary outcome was to evaluate the contribution of nodal assessment to the decision for adjuvant treatment in both high-risk and high-intermediate risk (HIR) patients submitted to surgery.

METHODS

Clinical stage I-II EC patients with postoperative diagnosis of HR and HIR disease were included. The contribution of nodal staging in prognostic groups allocation was assessed by reviewing HR patients to identify those without any other feature of such class (non-endometrioid histology, p53abn immunohistochemistry, post-operative T3-T4 disease) and HIR cases to assess how nodal staging affected adjuvant treatment indication. Descriptive statistics were conducted to describe the two populations.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients were included, 46 with HR and 11 with HIR disease. Chemotherapy and external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) were proposed in 40 HR patients. Considering histology, immunohistochemical profile and FIGO stage, high risk classification was exclusively relied on nodal involvement in 2/46 cases (4.3 %). Omitting retroperitoneal staging, one of them would have been classified in the intermediate risk group and the other as HIR: without nodal staging, chemotherapy and EBRT would have been omitted in 1/40 (2.5 %) case. Among HIR patients, chemotherapy was proposed in 7/11 cases and EBRT in all cases. Adjuvant chemotherapy was indicated in 5/6 (83.3 %) and omitted in 1/6 (16.7 %) pN0 patient (stage Ib G2, substantial LVSI). In HIRpN0 patients, omitting nodal staging could have changed adjuvant treatment indication in 1/6 (16.7 %) case. In HIRpNx patients, adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted in one patient (stage II, grade 2 and LVSI negative): nodal staging unavailability might have changed indication to chemotherapy in 1/5 (20 %) case, without changing indication to EBRT. Unavailable nodal staging could globally be related to omission of chemotherapy in 2/57 (3.5 %) patients and of EBRT in 1/57 (1.8 %) patient.

CONCLUSIONS

In this series, nodal staging had limited impact on definition of HR class and on the choice of adjuvant treatment in HR and HIR EC patients.

Range of Resection in Endometrial Cancer-Clinical Issues of Made-to-Measure Surgery

Endometrial cancer (EC) poses a significant health issue among women, and its incidence has been rising for a couple of decades. Surgery remains its principal treatment method and may have a curative, staging, or palliative aim. The type and extent of surgery depends on many factors, and the risks and benefits should be carefully weighed. While simple hysterectomy might be sufficient in early stage EC, modified-radical hysterectomy is sometimes indicated. In advanced disease, the evidence suggests that, similarly to ovarian cancer, optimal cytoreduction improves survival rate. The role of lymphadenectomy in EC patients has long been a controversial issue. The rationale for systematic lymphadenectomy and the procedure of the sentinel lymph node biopsy are thoroughly discussed. Finally, the impact of the molecular classification and new International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system on EC treatment is outlined. Due to the increasing knowledge on the pathology and molecular features of EC, as well as the new advances in the adjuvant therapies, the surgical management of EC has become more complex. In the modern approach, it is essential to adjust the extent of the surgery to a specific patient, ensuring an optimal, made-to-measure personalized surgery. This narrative review focuses on the intricacies of surgical management of EC and aims at summarizing the available literature on the subject, providing an up-to-date clinical guide.

Sentinel node mapping in high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer: Analysis of 5-year oncologic outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To assess 5-year oncologic outcomes of apparent early-stage high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer undergoing sentinel node mapping versus systematic lymphadenectomy.

METHODS

This is a multi-institutional retrospective, propensity-matched study evaluating data of high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer (according to ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines) undergoing sentinel node mapping versus systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy (with and without para-aortic lymphadenectomy). Survival outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard methods.

RESULTS

Overall, the charts of 242 patients with high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer were retrieved. Data on 73 (30.1%) patients undergoing hysterectomy plus sentinel node mapping were analyzed. Forty-two (57.5%) and 31 (42.5%) patients were classified in the high-intermediate and high-risk groups, respectively. Unilateral sentinel node mapping was achieved in all patients. Bilateral mapping was achieved in 67 (91.7%) patients. Three (4.1%) patients had site-specific lymphadenectomy (two pelvic areas only and one pelvic plus para-aortic area), while adjunctive nodal dissection was omitted in the hemipelvis of the other three (4.1%) patients. Sentinel nodes were detected in the para-aortic area in eight (10.9%) patients. Twenty-four (32.8%) patients were diagnosed with nodal disease. A propensity-score matching was used to compare the aforementioned group of patients undergoing sentinel node mapping with a group of patients undergoing lymphadenectomy. Seventy patient pairs were selected (70 having sentinel node mapping vs. 70 having lymphadenectomy). Patients undergoing sentinel node mapping experienced similar 5-year disease-free survival (HR: 1.233; 95%CI: 0.6217 to 2.444; p = 0.547, log-rank test) and 5-year overall survival (HR: 1.505; 95%CI: 0.6752 to 3.355; p = 0.256, log-rank test) than patients undergoing lymphadenectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Sentinel node mapping does not negatively impact 5-year outcomes of high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer. Further prospective studies are warranted.

Risk factors for pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastasis in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk factors for pelvic lymph node metastasis (LNM) and para-aortic LNM in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer (non-EEC).

METHODS

A total of 283 patients with non-EEC hospitalized in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from January 2012 to December 2020 were included. Various characteristics were retrospectively analyzed in relation to LNM.

RESULTS

Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed cervical stromal invasion (OR = 3.441, 95% CI = 1.558-7.6, p = 0.002), myometrial invasion ≥1/2 (OR = 2.661, 95% CI = 1.327-5.337, p < 0.006), lymphovascular space involvement (LVSI) (OR = 4.118, 95% CI = 1.919-8.837, p < 0.001), positive peritoneal cytology (OR = 2.962, 95% CI = 1.344-6.530, p = 0.007), CA125 (OR = 1.002, 95% CI = 1-1.004, p = 0.026) were the independent risk factors for pelvic LNM. And myometrial invasion ≥1/2 (OR = 5.881, 95% CI = 2.056-16.427, p = 0.001), LVSI (OR = 4.962, 95% CI = 1.933-12.740, p = 0.001), adnexal (OR = 5.921, 95% CI = 2.003-17.502, p = 0.001) were the independent risk factors for para-aortic LNM. With the increase of independent risk factors, the rates of LNM were increased significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical stromal invasion, myometrial invasion ≥1/2, LVSI, positive peritoneal cytology, and CA125 were risk factors for pelvic LNM. Myometrial invasion ≥1/2, LVSI and involvement of the adnexa were risk factors for para-aortic LNM which could provide a good basis to help predict which non-EEC patients are at higher risk for LNM.

Sentinel node mapping in endometrial cancer

Nodal status is one of the most important prognostic factors for patients with apparent early stage endometrial cancer. The role of retroperitoneal staging in endometrial cancer is controversial. Nodal status provides useful prognostic data, and allows to tailor the need of postoperative treatments. However, two independent randomized trials showed that the execution of (pelvic) lymphadenectomy increases the risk of having surgery-related complication without improving patients' outcomes. Sentinel node mapping aims to achieve data regarding nodal status without increasing morbidity. Sentinel node mapping is the removal of first (clinically negative) lymph nodes draining the uterus. Several studies suggested that sentinel node mapping is not inferior to lymphadenectomy in identifying patients with nodal disease. More importantly, thorough ultrastaging sentinel node mapping allows the detection of low volume disease (micrometastases and isolated tumor cells), that are not always detectable via conventional pathological examination. Therefore, the adoption of sentinel node mapping guarantees a higher identification of patients with nodal disease than lymphadenectomy. Further evidence is needed to assess the value of various adjuvant strategies in patients with low volume disease and to tailor those treatments also on the basis of the molecular and genomic characterization of endometrial tumors.

Oncologic Outcome of Robotic-Assisted and Laparoscopic Sentinel Node Biopsy in Endometrial Cancer

BACKGROUND

Recently, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has been introduced in the surgical staging of endometrial cancer as an alternative to systematic lymph node dissection (LND). However, the survival impact of SLNB is not yet well characterised.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 419 patients with endometrial cancer treated with SLNB alone or with pelvic and para-aortic LND. For SLNB mapping, indocyanine green was used.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 66 months. After exclusions, 337 patients were eligible for analysis. Of them, 150 underwent SLNB and 187 LND. During the follow-up time, 27 (24.7%) of the 150 who underwent SLNB and 54 (28.9%) of the 187 who underwent LND were diagnosed with recurrent disease (p = 0.459). The estimated 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 76.7% and 72.2% for patients in the SLNB and LND group, respectively (p = 0.419). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 80.7% and 77.0% in the SLNB and LND group, respectively (p = 0.895). Survival rates were similar in both groups independent of lymph node status. Multivariable analysis confirmed that the staging approach was not associated with oncological outcome. For patients without lymph node metastases, patient outcome was worsened by advanced tumour stage and non-endometrioid tumour histology. In the group of patients with confirmed lymph node metastases, advanced tumour stage and inadequate adjuvant treatment significantly reduced DFS and OS.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggested that SLNB did not compromise the oncological outcome of patients with endometrial cancer compared to LND.

Comparison of progression-free survival outcome of sentinel node biopsy without ultrastaging versus lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer: a propensity-matched analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the oncologic outcomes of patients with endometrial cancer who underwent sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy without ultrastaging compared with that of those who underwent lymphadenectomy (LND).

METHODS

Patients with endometrial cancer who underwent staging with SLN biopsy or LND during 2006 - 2021 were analyzed using propensity score matching (PSM). SLN metastasis was examined using hematoxylin and eosin staining, without ultrastaging. Progression-free survival (PFS) was compared between the two groups before and after PSM using age, histology, and stage as covariates. Clinical variables such as recurrence patterns and lymphatic complications, were assessed.

RESULTS

After excluding 213 patients who underwent validation LND with SLN biopsy, 902 were identified. The demographics of the remaining patients differed according to histology, myometrial invasion depth, and stage. Lymph node metastasis was less frequent in the SLN group than in the LND group (9.4% vs. 3.8%, p=0.004). The recurrence rates within 2 years were lower in the SLN group. The SLN group exhibited significantly superior 2-year and overall PFS than the LND group. Among patients with uterus-confined disease, overall PFS was favorable for SLN biopsy. After matching, differences in PFS were no longer observed, although the lymphocele and lymphedema rates were significantly lower in the SLN group.

CONCLUSION

In patients with endometrial cancer, SLN biopsy without ultrastaging did not compromise survival outcomes and was associated with significantly reduced lymphatic complication rates compared with LND. Therefore, SLN biopsy can be recommended for patients with endometrial cancer without definitive preoperative evidence of distant metastasis.

Outcomes for patients with high-risk endometrial cancer undergoing sentinel lymph node assessment versus full lymphadenectomy

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with high-risk endometrial cancer (EC) who underwent sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping and dissection compared to patients who underwent pelvic +/- para-aortic lymphadenectomy (LND).

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed high-risk EC were identified. Inclusion criteria included patients who underwent primary surgical management from January 1, 2014 to September 1, 2020 at our institution. Patients were categorized into either the SLN or LND group based on their method of planned lymph node assessment. Patients in the SLN group had dye injected followed by successful bilateral lymph node mapping, retrieval, and processing per our institutional protocol. Clinicopathological and follow-up data were extracted from patient's medical records. The t-test or Mann-Whitney test was used to compare continuous variables and Chi-squared or Fisher's exact test were used for categorical variables. Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated from the date of initial surgery to the date of progression, death, or last follow-up. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of surgical staging to the date of death or last follow-up. Three-year PFS and OS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to compare cohorts. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the relationship between nodal assessment cohort and OS/PFS while adjusting for age, adjuvant therapy, and surgical approach. A result was considered statistically significant at the p < 0.05 level of significance and all statistical analysis was done using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

RESULTS

Out of 674 patients diagnosed with EC during the study period, 189 were diagnosed with high-risk EC based on our criteria. Forty-six (23.7%) patients underwent SLN assessment and 143 (73.7%) underwent LND. No difference was observed between the two groups in regards to age, histology, stage, body mass index, tumors myometrial invasion, lymphovascular space invasion, or peritoneal washing positivity. Patients in the SLN group underwent robotic-assisted procedures more frequently than those in the LND group (p < 0.0001). The three-year PFS rate was 71.1% (95% CI 51.3-84.0%) in the SLN group and 71.3% (95% CI 62.0-78.6%) in the LND group (p = 0.91). The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence in the SLN versus LND group was 1.11 (95% CI 0.56-2.18; p = 0.77), and after adjusting for age, adjuvant therapy, and surgical approach, the HR for recurrence was 1.04 (95% CI 0.47-2.30, p = 0.91). The three-year OS rate was 81.1% (95% CI 51.1-93.7%) in the SLN group and 95.1% (95% CI 89.4-97.8%) in the LND group (p = 0.009). Although the unadjusted HR for death was 3.74 in the SLN vs LND group (95% CI 1.39-10.09; p = 0.009), when adjusted for age, adjuvant therapy, and surgical approach, it was no longer significant with a HR of 2.90 (95% CI 0.94-8.95, p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in three-year PFS in patients diagnosed with high-risk EC who underwent SLN evaluation compared to those who underwent full LND in our cohort. The SLN group did experience shorter unadjusted OS; however, when adjusting for age, adjuvant therapy and surgical approach, there was no difference OS in patients who underwent SLN compared to LND.

Hysterectomy alone vs. hysterectomy plus sentinel node mapping in endometrial cancer: Perioperative and long-term results from a propensity-score based study

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes after hysterectomy and hysterectomy plus sentinel node mapping (SNM) in endometrial cancer (EC) patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study, collecting data of EC patients treated between 2006 and 2016 in nine referral centers.

RESULTS

The study population included 398 (69.5%) and 174 (30.5%) patients having hysterectomy and hysterectomy plus SNM. As the results of the adoption of a propensity-score matched analysis, we selected two homogeneous cohort of patients (150 having hysterectomy only vs. 150 having hysterectomy plus SNM). The SNM group had a longer operative time, but did not correlate with length of hospital stay and estimated blood loss. Overall severe complication rates were similar between groups (0.7% in the hysterectomy group vs. 1.3% in the hysterectomy plus SNM group; p = 0.561). No lymphatic-specific complication occurred. Overall, 12.6% of patients having SNM were diagnosed with disease harboring in their lymph nodes. Adjuvant therapy administration rate was similar between groups. Considering patients having SNM, 4% of patients received adjuvant therapy on the basis of nodal status alone; all the other patients received adjuvant therapy also on the basis of uterine risk factors. Five-year disease-free (p = 0.720) and overall (p = 0.632) survival was not influenced by surgical approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Hysterectomy (with or without SNM) is a safe and effective method for managing EC patients. Potentially, these data support the omission of side specific lymphadenectomy in case of unsuccessful mapping. Further evidence is warranted in to confirm the role SNM in the era of molecular/genomic profiling.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Uterine Cancer: Time for a Modern Approach

Since the validation of the sentinel node technique (SLN) for vulvar cancer 20 years ago, this technique has been introduced in the management of operable cervical cancer and endometrial cancer. For cervical cancer a "one fits all" attitude has mainly been presented. However, this approach, consisting of a frozen section during the operation, can be discussed in some stages. We present and discuss the main option for each stage, as well as some secondary possibilities. For endometrial cancer, SLN is now the technique of choice for the nodal staging of low- and intermediate-risk groups. Some discussion exists for the high-risk group. We also discuss the impacts of using preoperatively the molecular classification of endometrial cancer. Patients with POLE or TP53 mutations could have different nodal staging. The story of SLN in uterine cancers is not finished. We propose a comprehensive algorithm of SLN in early cervical and endometrial cancers. However, several ongoing trials will give us important data in the coming years. They could substantially change these propositions.

Radiation Therapy for Endometrial Cancer: An American Society for Radiation Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

With the results of several recently published clinical trials, this guideline informs on the use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) and systemic therapy in the treatment of endometrial cancer. Updated evidence-based recommendations provide indications for adjuvant RT and the associated techniques, the utilization and sequencing of adjuvant systemic therapies, and the effect of surgical staging techniques and molecular tumor profiling.

METHODS

The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a multidisciplinary task force to address 6 key questions that focused on the adjuvant management of patients with endometrial cancer. The key questions emphasized the (1) indications for adjuvant RT, (2) RT techniques, target volumes, dose fractionation, and treatment planning aims, (3) indications for systemic therapy, (4) sequencing of systemic therapy with RT, (5) effect of lymph node assessment on utilization of adjuvant therapy, and (6) effect of molecular tumor profiling on utilization of adjuvant therapy. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for quality of evidence grading and strength of recommendation.

RESULTS

The task force recommends RT (either vaginal brachytherapy or external beam RT) be given based on the patient's clinical-pathologic risk factors to reduce risk of vaginal and/or pelvic recurrence. When external beam RT is delivered, intensity modulated RT with daily image guided RT is recommended to reduce acute and late toxicity. Chemotherapy is recommended for patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I to II with high-risk histologies and those with FIGO stage III to IVA with any histology. When sequencing chemotherapy and RT, there is no prospective data to support an optimal sequence. Sentinel lymph node mapping is recommended over pelvic lymphadenectomy for surgical nodal staging. Data on sentinel lymph node pathologic ultrastaging status supports that patients with isolated tumor cells be treated as node negative and adjuvant therapy based on uterine risk factors and patients with micrometastases be treated as node positive. The available data on molecular characterization of endometrial cancer are compelling and should be increasingly considered when making recommendations for adjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations guide evidence-based best clinical practices on the use of adjuvant therapy for endometrial cancer.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping has been adopted as an acceptable method of lymph node evaluation in the surgical staging for low-grade endometrial cancer. In this review, we analyze the literature on the utility of SLN mapping in high-grade endometrial cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

SLN mapping in high-grade endometrial cancer demonstrates similar high detection rates and diagnostic accuracy as seen in low-grade endometrial cancers. However, obtaining sufficient operator experience (at least 30 cases) and following SLN mapping algorithm continues to be essential to preserving diagnostic accuracy. Although limited in retrospective study design and short-term follow-up, current studies have not demonstrated inferior survival outcomes of SLN mapping compared to traditional lymphadenectomy. SLN mapping is an acceptable and accurate method of lymph node evaluation in high-grade endometrial cancer. Future prospective studies are needed to evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes between SLN mapping and systematic lymphadenectomy in this patient population.

Beyond Serous: Treatment Options for Rare Endometrial Cancers

OPINION STATEMENT

Rare endometrial cancers are high-grade, aggressive malignancies which are often diagnosed at an advanced stage, and account for disproportionately more deaths than their more common low-grade counterparts. Standard of care includes a combination of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. Surgery consists of complete hysterectomy, and more recent evidence supports replacing a full lymphadenectomy with sentinel node mapping. Paclitaxel and carboplatin remain the mainstays of chemotherapy, while current studies incorporating immunotherapy will inform future practice. Whether and how to incorporate radiation remains controversial, and certain histologic subtypes, such as carcinosarcomas, may benefit from radiation more than others. Owing to their relative rarity, it is difficult to conduct clinical trials in this patient population, which has hindered the development of effective therapies for rare malignancies. Molecular profiling has offered insight into the pathogenesis of rare endometrial cancers, providing actionable targets for personalized therapy.

Applications and Safety of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Endometrial Cancer

Lymph node status is important in predicting the prognosis and guiding adjuvant treatment in endometrial cancer. However, previous studies showed that systematic lymphadenectomy conferred no therapeutic values in clinically early-stage endometrial cancer but might lead to substantial morbidity and impact on the quality of life of the patients. The sentinel lymph node is the first lymph node that tumor cells drain to, and sentinel lymph node biopsy has emerged as an acceptable alternative to full lymphadenectomy in both low-risk and high-risk endometrial cancer. Evidence has demonstrated a high detection rate, sensitivity and negative predictive value of sentinel lymph node biopsy. It can also reduce surgical morbidity and improve the detection of lymph node metastases compared with systematic lymphadenectomy. This review summarizes the current techniques of sentinel lymph node mapping, the applications and oncological outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy in low-risk and high-risk endometrial cancer, and the management of isolated tumor cells in sentinel lymph nodes. We also illustrate a revised sentinel lymph node biopsy algorithm and advocate to repeat the tracer injection and explore the presacral and paraaortic areas if sentinel lymph nodes are not found in the hemipelvis.

Sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial cancer to reduce surgical morbidity: always, sometimes, or never

Introduction

Surgical staging of nodal status is of utmost significance to determine the stage of endometrial cancer and construct a targeted treatment plan. Systematic lymphadenectomy has for years been the procedure of choice for staging purposes, enabling thorough assessment of lymph nodes. Nevertheless, it is associated with increased morbidity and severe postoperative complications. In an attempt to avoid the disadvantages of lymphadenectomy, the use of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has been examined as an alternative staging procedure.The purpose of the present review is to summarize and provide up-to-date evidence about the role of SLN biopsy in the staging and management of endometrial cancer cases in the terms of optimal technique, efficacy, safety, and postoperative morbidity, as an alternative approach to regional lymphadenectomy.

Material and methods

A thorough literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and SCOPUS to identify recent primary research and previous review articles that explore the use of SLN mapping as a staging procedure in patients with endometrial cancer.

Results

There is increasing evidence that SLN mapping is efficient in identifying metastatic nodal disease without compromising oncological safety, achieving comparable or even superior detection rates to those of lymphadenectomy, when optimal technique and careful intraoperative nodal assessment are applied.

Conclusions

Sentinel lymph node mapping can safely replace lymphadenectomy as an acceptable alternative staging method for endometrial cancer; however, future research might further strengthen this suggestion by resolving potential areas of doubt and debate, especially for high-risk endometrial cancer cases.

The Role of Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping in High-grade Endometrial Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Total hysterectomy with lymph node assessment is the current standard-of-care for surgical staging in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer. Compared to the traditional complete pelvic lymphadenectomy with or without para-aortic lymphadenectomy, sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping results in fewer surgical complications, decreased operative time, and lower rates of chronic lymphedema. The technique is endorsed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines, and over the past two decades the majority of gynecologic oncologists worldwide have adopted SLN mapping into their practice. However, as the results of the initial SLN studies were mostly based on low-grade tumors, adoption of the technique in high-grade tumors has been slower and more controversial. In this review, we discuss the most recent studies evaluating the SLN mapping in high-grade endometrial cancers. The results of these studies suggest that the SLN detection rate is acceptably high and the negative predictive value is sufficiently low to support the use of SLN mapping in high-grade endometrial tumors to replace complete lymphadenectomy. Validity of SLN mapping techniques does, however, require following a standard algorithm, and success depends also on surgeon expertise. Moreover, the impact of SLN mapping on overall survival in high-grade tumors requires future prospective randomized studies. Finally, a transition toward near-universal SLN mapping techniques for endometrial cancers could significantly impact on the adequacy of gynecologic oncology fellows' surgical training and competency in lymphadenectomy.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in high-risk endometrial cancer: performance, outcomes, and future avenues

Endometrial cancer is the second most common gynecological malignancy worldwide, with an overall favorable prognosis. However, a subgroup of patients has a high risk of recurrence and poor prognosis. This review summarizes recently published articles that examined sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in patients with high-risk endometrial cancer. We focused on the performance and outcomes of SLN biopsy, and examined potential methods for improving the management of this high-risk subset. Few studies have examined the long-term outcomes of SLN in patients with high-risk endometrial cancer. Thus, we reviewed recently published retrospective studies that have adopted statistical techniques, such as inverse probability weighting or propensity score matching, to examine the outcome of SLN biopsy compared to conventional lymphadenectomy. Potential avenues for future research to fine-tune decision making for this patient subgroup were also discussed.

Evaluating long-term outcomes of three approaches to retroperitoneal staging in endometrial cancer

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.

Role of sentinel lymph node biopsy for gynecologic cancers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of the current knowledge and recent advances of sentinel lymph node (SLN) assessment in uterine, cervical, vulvar, and ovarian cancers.

RECENT FINDINGS

In endometrial cancer, SLN evaluation has become increasingly utilized as part of the treatment of early-stage disease, with data showing improved detection of pelvic lymph node metastasis. In cervical cancer, SLN biopsy has also gained increasing traction with studies demonstrating the feasibility and accuracy of SLN detection. Evaluation with frozen section, however, remains limited in the detection of metastases. The prognostic significance of positive SLN in vulvar cancer is currently being investigated, with preliminary data showing lower recurrence rates in patients receiving adjuvant radiation.

SUMMARY

SLN evaluation remains standard of care to detect lymph node metastasis in early-staged endometrial cancer. In cervical cancer, SLN biopsy has been shown to be reliable, while decreasing morbidity without impacting disease-free survival in select patients. The technique and high sensitivity of SLN biopsy in vulvar cancer has been demonstrated in large prospective trials. There are no randomized controlled trials in ovarian cancer that evaluate the role of SLN biopsy on treatment and outcome; current SLN evaluation remains investigational.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy alone compared to systematic lymphadenectomy in patients with uterine carcinosarcoma

OBJECTIVE

To assess survival among patients diagnosed with uterine carcinosarcoma (CS) who underwent sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy alone vs. systematic lymph node dissection (LND).

METHODS

We identified newly diagnosed CS patients who underwent primary surgical management from January 1996-December 2019. The SLN cohort underwent SLN biopsy alone with bilateral SLNs identified. The systematic LND cohort did not undergo SLN biopsy.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine patients underwent SLN biopsy, and 100 patients underwent systematic LND. There was no difference by age, stage, body mass index, myoinvasion (<50%, ≥50%), lymphovascular space invasion, or positive washings. Eighty-five SLN (85.9%) and 15 LND (15%) underwent minimally invasive surgery (P < 0.001). The median total node count was four (range, 1-13) for SLN and 19 (range, 2-50) for LND (P < 0.001). Nodal metastasis occurred in 23 (23.2%) SLN and in 22 (22%) LND (P = 0.4). Postoperative therapy was administered to 85 (85.9%) SLN and 71 (71%) LND (P = 0.02). Median follow-up was 33 months (range, 1-205) for SLN and 55.3 months (range, 1-269) for LND (P = 0.001). The three-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 62.9% (SE 5.2%) for SLN and 52.3% (SE 5.3%) for LND (P = 0.13). The three-year overall survival (OS) was 72.1% (SE 5.1%) for SLN and 71.6% (SE 4.6%) for LND (P = 0.68). An isolated nodal recurrence occurred in two (2%) SLN and four (4%) LND (P = 0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in PFS or OS among CS patients who undergo SLN biopsy vs. systematic LND. SLN biopsy detects nodal metastasis without compromising oncologic outcomes.

Diagnostic accuracy of sentinel node biopsy in non-endometrioid, high-grade and/or deep myoinvasive endometrial cancer: A Turkish gynecologic oncology group study (TRSGO-SLN-006)

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping algorithm in high-risk endometrial cancer patients.

METHODS

Two hundred forty-four patients with non-endometrioid histology, grade 3 endometrioid tumors and/or tumors with deep myometrial invasion were enrolled in this retrospective, multicentric study. After removal of SLNs, all patients underwent pelvic ± paraaortic lymphadenectomy. Operations were performed via laparotomy, laparoscopy or robotic surgery. Indocyanine green (ICG) and methylene blue (MB) were used as tracers. SLN detection rate, sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV) and false-negative rate (FNR) were calculated.

RESULTS

Surgeries were performed via laparotomy in 132 (54.1%) patients and 152 (62.3%) underwent both bilateral pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy. At least 1 SLN was detected in 222 (91%) patients. Fifty-five (22.5%) patients had lymphatic metastasis and 45 patients had at least 1 metastatic SLN. Lymphatic metastases were detected by side-specific lymphadenectomy in 8 patients and 2 patients had isolated paraaortic metastasis. Overall sensitivity, NPV and FNR of SLN biopsy were 81.8%, 95% and 18.2%, respectively. By applying SLN algorithm steps, sensitivity and NPV improved to 96.4% and 98.9%, respectively. For grade 3 tumors, sensitivity, NPV and FNR of the SLN algorithm were 97.1%, 98.9% and 2.9%.

CONCLUSION

SLN algorithm had high diagnostic accuracy in high-risk endometrial cancer. All pelvic metastases were detected by the SLN algorithm and the isolated paraaortic metastasis rate was ignorable. But long-term survival studies are necessary before this approach becomes standard of care.

The efficiency of a combined injection technique for sentinel lymph node mapping in intermediate-high-risk endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping was considered for treating endometrial cancer (EC) which was apparent confined to the uterus. Nevertheless, intermediate-high-risk EC patients have super high risk to undergo isolated para-aortic lymph node metastases comparing with low-risk patients. Therefore, this investigation aimed to compare the efficacy of two SLN methods in detecting para-aortic lymph node metastases.

METHODS

According to SLN mapping injection methods, intermediate-high-risk EC patients who received both SLN mapping and systematic lymphadenectomy were divided into the combined group (fundal and cervical injections) and the cervical group (cervical injection only).

RESULTS

The para-aortic SLN detection rate in the combined group (40.4%) was higher than that in the cervical group (4.4%) with p < 0.001. While the differences concerning the sensitivity, false-negative rate, and negative predictive value between the two groups were not significant. The survival outcomes of patients were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our data showcased that the combined (fundal and cervical) injection had a higher detection rate of para-aortic SLNs than cervical injection only. The efficiency of SLN mapping and the survival outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups. Further investigations are warranted to assess the value of combined injection regarding SLN technique.

Advances in management of nonendometrioid endometrial carcinoma, with an emphasis on the sentinel lymph node technique

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

During the last few years there have been important advances in our understanding of endometrial cancer biology, staging, and therapy. In this article, we discuss updates and controversies in the treatment of nonendometrioid endometrial carcinoma (non-EEC), with an emphasis on the role of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Lymph node involvement is an important factor in determining prognosis and guiding adjuvant therapy in endometrial carcinoma. SLN biopsy has emerged as a less morbid alternative to lymphadenectomy in surgical staging, and it has generally gained acceptance in the setting of low-grade endometrial carcinoma; however, its role in the setting of high-grade disease remains a topic of debate. Several prospective studies have demonstrated the accuracy of SLN biopsy in detecting nodal metastasis in high-grade endometrial carcinoma. Retrospective series have compared oncologic outcomes of patients with high-grade disease, surgically staged by SLN biopsy, to those staged with lymphadenectomy, and have reported similar survival outcomes. Prospective data on survival is lacking.

SUMMARY

Currently, there is sufficient data to support the diagnostic accuracy of SLN biopsy in the surgical staging of non-EEC. The retrospective evidence demonstrates similar survival for SLN biopsy versus lymphadenectomy.

Update on Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Surgical Staging of Endometrial Carcinoma

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has emerged as an alternative staging approach in women with assumed early-stage endometrial carcinoma. Through image-guided surgery and pathologic ultrastaging, the SLN approach is introducing “precision medicine” to the surgical management of gynecologic cancers, providing a comprehensive evaluation of high-yield lymph nodes. This approach improves the surgeons’ ability to detect small-volume metastatic disease while reducing intraoperative and postoperative morbidity associated with lymphadenectomy. Although the majority of clinicians in Europe and the USA have recognized the value of SLN biopsy in endometrial carcinoma and introduced this as part of clinical practice, there is ongoing debate regarding its role in very low-risk patients as well as in patients at high risk of nodal metastasis. The significance of low-volume metastasis is not fully understood, and there is no consensus in regard to how the presence of isolated tumor cells should guide adjuvant therapy. Standardized protocols for histopathologic evaluation of SLNs are lacking. In this review article we aim to provide a framework for the introduction of SLN biopsy in endometrial cancer, give an updated overview of the existing literature, as well as discuss potential controversies and unanswered questions regarding this approach and future directions.

Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping in Endometrial Cancer: A Comprehensive Review

Endometrial cancer (EC) is known as a common gynecological malignancy. The incidence rate is on the increase annually. Lymph node status plays a crucial role in evaluating the prognosis and selecting adjuvant therapy. Currently, the patients with high-risk (not comply with any of the following: (1) well-differentiated or moderately differentiated, pathological grade G1 or G2; (2) myometrial invasion< 1/2; (3) tumor diameter < 2 cm are commonly recommended for a systematic lymphadenectomy (LAD). However, conventional LAD shows high complication incidence and uncertain survival benefits. Sentinel lymph node (SLN) refers to the first lymph node that is passed by the lymphatic metastasis of the primary malignant tumor through the regional lymphatic drainage pathway and can indicate the involvement of lymph nodes across the drainage area. Mounting evidence has demonstrated a high detection rate (DR), sensitivity, and negative predictive value (NPV) in patients with early-stage lower risk EC using sentinel lymph node mapping (SLNM) with pathologic ultra-staging. Meanwhile, SLNM did not compromise the patient’s progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with low operative complications. However, the application of SLNM in early-stage high-risk EC patients remains controversial. As revealed by the recent studies, SLNM may also be feasible, effective, and safe in high-risk patients. This review aims at making a systematic description of the progress made in the application of SLNM in the treatment of EC and the relevant controversies, including the application of SLNM in high-risk patients.

Controversies in the Management of Early-stage Serous Endometrial Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

Early-stage uterine serous carcinoma (USC) has one of the highest recurrence rates and mortality among early-stage uterine epithelial cancers. Research into the clinical management of USC has begun to progress, guided by surgical and pathological advances. This article summarizes the available literature regarding diagnosis, management, and possible future uses of molecular analysis of women with early-stage USC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed was searched for all pertinent English language research articles published from January 1, 2006 through March 1, 2020 which included a study population of women diagnosed with stage 1 USC. Due to the scarcity of prospective or large-scale data, studies were not limited by design or numbers of patients. Studies performed at earlier dates were incorporated to provide context.

RESULTS

A total of 86 studies were included in the review. Multiple well-designed studies have confirmed the safety of a minimally invasive surgical approach for surgical management of USC. The role of sentinel node biopsy has been validated with both prospective and retrospective multi-center data. Stage I USC is associated with a highly variable risk of recurrence, even following completion of adjuvant chemoradiation. This aggressive phenotype has been linked to high numbers of somatic copy number alterations, tumor protein 53, and phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase mutations, which have been shown to be predictive of prognosis.

CONCLUSION

Early-stage USC demonstrates a lack of predictable recurrence patterns, with reports noting distant recurrence in patients with disease confined to polyps. Unless no residual tumor is found on hysterectomy, chemotherapy and radiotherapy should be discussed and individualized by stage and treatment goals.

Status of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Endometrial Cancer

The role of lymphadenectomy in surgical staging remains one of the biggest controversies in the management of endometrial cancer. The concept of sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer has been evaluated for a number of years, with promising sensitivity rates and negative predictive values. The possibility of adequate staging while avoiding systematic lymphadenectomy leads to a significant reduction in the rate of peri- and postoperative morbidity. Nevertheless, the status of sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer has not yet been fully elucidated and is variously assessed internationally. According to current European guidelines and recommendations, sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer should be performed only in the context of clinical studies. In this review article, the developments of the past decade are explored concisely. In addition, current data regarding the technical aspects, accuracy and prognostic relevance of sentinel lymph node biopsy are explained and evaluated critically.

Sentinel node mapping using indocyanine green and near-infrared fluorescence imaging technology for endometrial cancer: A prospective study using a surgical algorithm in Indian patients

Background:

Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence with high-definition, three-dimensional imaging systems is emerging as the latest strategy to reduce trauma and improve surgical outcomes during oncosurgery.

Materials and Methods:

This is a prospective study involving 100 patients with carcinoma endometrium who underwent robotic-assisted Type 1 pan-hysterectomy, with ICG-directed sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy from November 2017 to December 2019. The aim was to assess the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of SLN algorithm and to evaluate the location and distribution of SLN in pelvic, para-aortic and unusual areas and the role of frozen section.

Results:

The overall SLN detection rate was 98%. Bilateral detection was possible in 92% of the cases. Right side was detected in 98% of the cases and left side was visualised in 92% of the cases. Complete node dissection was done where SLN mapping failed. The most common location for SLN in our series was obturator on the right hemipelvis and internal iliac on the left hemipelvis. SLN in the para-aortic area was detected in 14% of cases. In six cases, SLN was found in atypical locations, that is pre-sacral area. Eight patients had SLN positivity for metastasis and underwent complete retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. Comparison of final histopathological report with frozen section reports showed no false negatives.

Conclusions:

SLN mapping holds a great promise as a modern staging strategy for endometrial cancer. In our experience, cervical injection was an optimal method of mapping the pelvis. ICG showed a high overall detection rate, and bilateral mapping appears to be a feasible alternative to the more traditional methods of SLN mapping in patients with endometrial cancer. The ICG fluorescence imaging system is simple and safe and may become a standard in oncosurgery in view of its staging and anatomical imaging capabilities. This approach can reduce the morbidity, operative times and costs associated with complete lymphadenectomy while maintaining prognostic and predictive information.

Sentinel node mapping vs. sentinel node mapping plus back-up lymphadenectomy in high-risk endometrial cancer patients: Results from a multi-institutional study

OBJECTIVE

Sentinel node mapping (SLN) has replaced lymphadenectomy for staging surgery in apparent early-stage low and intermediate risk endometrial cancer (EC). Only limited data about the adoption of SNM in high risk EC is still available. Here, we evaluate the outcomes of high-risk EC undergoing SNM (with or without back-up lymphadenectomy).

METHODS

This is a multi-institutional international retrospective study, evaluating data of high-risk (FIGO grade 3 endometrioid EC with myometrial invasion >50% and non-endometrioid histology) EC patients undergoing SNM followed by back-up lymphadenectomy and SNM alone.

RESULTS

Chart of consecutive 196 patients were evaluated. The study population included 83 and 113 patients with endometrioid and non-endometrioid EC, respectively. SNM alone and SNM followed by back-up lymphadenectomy were performed in 50 and 146 patients, respectively. Among patients having SNM alone, 14 (28%) were diagnosed with nodal disease. In the group of patients undergoing SNM plus back-up lymphadenectomy 34 (23.2%) were diagnosed with nodal disease via SNM. Back-up lymphadenectomy identified 2 (1%) additional patients with nodal disease (in the para-aortic area). Back-up lymphadenectomy allowed to remove adjunctive positive nodes in 16 (11%) patients. After the adoption of propensity-matched algorithm, we observed that patients undergoing SNM plus back-up lymphadenectomy experienced similar disease-free survival (p = 0.416, log-rank test) and overall survival (p = 0.940, log-rank test) than patients undergoing SLN alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the small sample size, and the retrospective study design this study highlighted that type of nodal assessment did not impact survival outcomes in high-risk EC. Theoretically, back-up lymphadenectomy would be useful in improving the removal of positive nodes, but its therapeutic value remains controversial. Further prospective evidence is needed.

Operative and Oncological Outcomes Comparing Sentinel Node Mapping and Systematic Lymphadenectomy in Endometrial Cancer Staging: Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis

Objective

To evaluate the utility of sentinel lymph node mapping (SLN) in endometrial cancer (EC) patients in comparison with lymphadenectomy (LND).

Methods

Comprehensive search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, OVID, Web of science databases, and three clinical trials registration websites, from the database inception to September 2020. The primary outcomes covered operative outcomes, nodal assessment, and oncological outcomes. Software Revman 5.3 was used. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) were performed.

Results

Overall, 5,820 EC patients from 15 studies were pooled in the meta-analysis: SLN group (N = 2,152, 37.0%), LND group (N = 3,668, 63.0%). In meta-analysis of blood loss, SLN offered advantage over LND in reducing operation bleeding (I² = 74%, P<0.01). Z-curve of blood loss crossed trial sequential monitoring boundaries though did not reach TSA sample size. There was no difference between SLN and LND in intra-operative complications (I² = 7%, P = 0.12). SLN was superior to LND in detecting positive pelvic nodes (P-LN) (I² = 36%, P<0.001), even in high risk patients (I² = 36%, P = 0.001). While no difference was observed in detection of positive para-aortic nodes (PA-LN) (I² = 47%, P = 0.76), even in high risk patients (I² = 62%, P = 0.34). Analysis showed no difference between two groups in the number of resected pelvic nodes (I² = 99%, P = 0.26). SLN was not associated with a statistically significant overall survival (I² = 79%, P = 0.94). There was no difference in progression-free survival between SLN and LND (I² = 52%, P = 0.31). No difference was observed in recurrence. Based on the GRADE assessment, we considered the quality of current evidence to be moderate for P-LN biopsy, low for items like blood loss, PA-LN positive.

Conclusion

The present meta-analysis underlines that SLN is capable of reducing blood loss during operation in regardless of surgical approach with firm evidence from TSA. SLN mapping is more targeted for less node dissection and more detection of positive lymph nodes even in high risk patients with conclusive evidence from TSA. Utility of SLN yields no survival detriment in EC patients.

Lymphedema and Post-Operative Complications after Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy versus Lymphadenectomy in Endometrial Carcinomas-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Lymph node dissection (LND) is recommended as staging procedure in presumed low stage endometrial cancer. LND is associated with risk of lower-extremity lymphedema and post-operative complications. The sentinel lymph node (SLN) procedure has been shown to have high diagnostic accuracy, but its effects on complication risk has been little studied. This systematic review compares the risk of lower-extremity lymphedema and post-operative complications in SLN versus LND in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Cochrane Library. Results: Seven retrospective and prospective studies (total n = 3046 patients) were included. Only three studies reported the odds ratio of lower-extremity lymphedema after SLN compared to LND, which was 0.05 (95% CI 0.01-0.37; p = 0.067), 0.07 (95% CI 0.00-1.21; p = 0.007) and 0.54 (95% CI 0.37-0.80; p = 0.002) in these studies. The pooled odds ratio of any post-operative complications after SLN versus LND was 0.52 (95% CI 0.36-0.73; I2 = 48%; p < 0.001). For severe post-operative complications the pooled odds ratio was 0.52 (95% CI 0.28-0.96; I2 = 0%; p = 0.04). Conclusions: There are strong indications that SLN results in a lower incidence of lower-extremity lymphedema and less often severe post-operative complications compared to LND. In spite of the paucity and heterogeneity of studies, direction of results was similar in all studies, supporting the aforementioned conclusion. These results support the increasing uptake of SLN procedures in endometrial cancer.

Controversies in Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Gynecologic Malignancies

OBJECTIVE

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy represents an evolution in the advancement of minimally invasive surgical techniques for gynecologic cancers. Prospective and retrospective studies have consistently shown its accuracy in the detection of lymph node metastases for endometrial and cervical cancers. However, consistent with any emerging surgical technique in the early phases of adoption, new questions have arisen regarding its application and impact. This paper served as a scoping review to identify the key controversies that have arisen in the field of SLN biopsy for endometrial and cervical cancers.

DATA SOURCES

Several key controversies were identified, and PubMed, the Cochrane Library (cochranelibrary.com) advanced search function, and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines were searched for supporting evidence. These included search terms such as "the accuracy of SLN biopsy for high grade endometrial cancer or cervical cancers >2-cm," "cost effectiveness of SLN biopsy for gynecologic cancers," "clinical significance of low volume metastases in endometrial cancer," "morbidity of SLN biopsy for endometrial and cervical cancer," and "impact on cancer survival of SLN biopsy for endometrial and cervical cancer."

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Studies were selected for review if they included significant numbers of patients, were level I evidence, or were prospective trials. Where this level of evidence failed to exist, seminal observational series that were published in high-quality journals were included.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Similar studies were listed and subcategorized and cross-compared, excluding those that included repeated analyses of the same patient populations. The relevant clinical trials or observational studies were clustered and reviewed for each chosen controversy. Adequate evidence supports the accuracy of SLN biopsy in the staging of high-grade endometrial cancer and cervical cancer, and it seems to be a cost-effective strategy for invasive endometrial cancer. Conclusive evidence was lacking with respect to the oncologic outcomes related to SLN biopsy, the impact on patient morbidity, and whether clinicians should treat isolated tumor cells in SLNs with adjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSION

SLN biopsy is an accepted staging strategy for cervical and endometrial cancer surgery; however, controversies remain in how it can be applied with the most safety and efficacy. These ultimately need to be resolved with further clinical trials and observations of larger series of patients.

Sentinel lymph node for endometrial cancer treatment: review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy and in two thirds of patients it is apparently uterine confined at presentation. Lymph nodal status represents one of the main prognostic factors. Nodal evaluation with sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping has gained more ground in clinical practice after the publication of different studies demonstrating the feasibility and accuracy of this technique. However, at the moment there are no RCTs available evaluating the long-term oncologic safety of SLN technique compared to LND. This review aims at summarizing the available evidence on oncologic outcomes between SLN mapping alone and LND. Differences in operative complications and long-term complications were also analyzed.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The literature search was conducted in the PubMed database and it focused on comparative studies published from inception to September 2020 analyzing differences in oncological outcomes or complications between nodal evaluation with SLN technique alone and nodal evaluation with lymphadenectomy. Comparative studies with more than 10 cases, published in English, were included.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 5 retrospective comparative studies have been identified reporting data on oncologic outcomes of patients who underwent SLN mapping alone vs. LND. Non significative difference has been reported in terms of overall survival and recurrence free survival between the two groups. Six studies evaluated differences in terms of complications between the two techniques. A total of 2302 patients were identified. Postoperative complications were detected in 9.6% and 7.7% of patients who underwent lymphadenectomy and SLN mapping respectively and no significant difference was noted (P=0.3). Looking at major postoperative complications the rate in the LND group was significantly higher than in the SLN group (3.6% vs. 1.5%, P=0.02). Two of these six studies reported data on lymphatic long-term complications. The prevalence of lymphedema ranged from 0% to 1.3% in the SLN group and from 10% to 18% in the LND group. The absolute difference reported (13.35%) was similar to the one found in literature.

CONCLUSIONS

SLN mapping in apparently uterine confined disease has been demonstrated to be a feasible and accurate technique for nodal evaluation and high-quality evidence support this. Moreover, SLN mapping resulted to be associated with less major postoperative and long-term complications when compared to LDN. Conversely, high-quality evidence is not available on long-term oncologic safety of this technique compared to the standard LND. Randomized trials are requested to provide reliable data on this aspect.

Standardization of lower extremity quantitative lymphedema measurements and associated patient-reported outcomes in gynecologic cancers

Practice changing standardization of lower extremity lymphedema quantitative measurements with integrated patient reported outcomes will likely refine and redefine the optimal risk-reduction strategies to diminish the devastating limb-related dysfunction and morbidity associated with treatment of gynecologic cancers. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), Division of Cancer Prevention brought together a diverse group of cancer treatment, therapy and patient reported outcomes experts to discuss the current state-of-the-science in lymphedema evaluation with the potential goal of incorporating new strategies for optimal evaluation of lymphedema in future developing gynecologic clinical trials.

Diagnostic accuracy and economic impact of three work-up strategies identifying risk groups in endometrial cancer, fully incorporating sentinel lymph node algorithm

BACKGROUND

According to the European Society for Medical Oncology/ European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESMO/ESGO/ESTRO) Consensus Conference, the role of preoperative risk groups (RGs) in endometrial cancer (EC) is to direct surgical nodal staging. We compared diagnostic accuracy and economic impact of three work-up strategies to identify RGs.

METHODS

A retrospective multicentre study including patients with early-stage EC. The three different work-up strategies were as follows:-Mondovì Hospital: transvaginal ultrasonography, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); frozen section examination of the uterus in case of imaging discordance. High-risk patients underwent abdominal computed tomography.-Gemelli Hospital: transvaginal ultrasonography, MRI, One-Step Nucleic Acid Amplification (OSNA) of sentinel lymph node (SLN); frozen section examination of the uterus in case of imaging discordance.-Negrar Hospital: positron emission tomography (PET), frozen section examination of the uterus and of SLN. For statistical purposes patients were assigned, preoperatively and postoperatively, to two groups: group A (high-risk) and group B (not high-risk).

RESULTS

Three hundred eighty-five patients were included (93 Mondovì, 215 Gemelli, 77 Negrar). Endometrial biopsy errors led to 47.3% misclassifications. Test accuracy of Mondovì, Gemelli and Negrar strategies was 0.83 (95%CI 0.734-0.901), 0.95 (95%CI 0.909-0.975) and 0.94 (95%CI 0.866-0.985), respectively. Preoperative work-up mean cost per patient in group A was €514.5 at Mondovì, €868.5 at Gemelli, and €1212.8 at Negrar hospital (p-value < 0.001), while in group B was €378.8 at Mondovì, €941.2 at Gemelli, and €1848.4 at Negrar hospital (p-value < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, work-up strategies with more relevant economic impact showed a better diagnostic accuracy. Upcoming guidelines should specify recommendations about the gold standard work-up strategy, including the role of SLN.

Gynecologic oncology at the time of COVID-19 outbreak

The World Health Organization (WHO) classified the novel coronavirus (i.e., coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) as a global public health emergency. COVID-19 threatens to curtail patient access to evidence-based treatment. Medicine is changing, basically due to the limited available resources. In the field of gynecologic oncology, we have to re-design our treatments' paradigm. During COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, the highest priority is to achieve the maximum benefit from less demanding procedures. Extensive procedures should be avoided, in order to reduce hospitalization and postoperative events that might increase the in-hospital spread of the virus. There are ongoing concerns on the use of laparoscopic procedures, related to the possible contamination of the staff working in the operation room. Other minimally invasive techniques, including, vaginal surgery as well as robotic-assisted and isobaric procedures would be preferred over laparoscopy. A fair allocation of resources is paramount adequate treatments.

The added value of sentinel node mapping in endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term oncological outcomes and the added value of sentinel lymph node sampling (SLN) compared to pelvic lymph node dissection (LND) in patients with endometrial cancer (EC).

METHODS

During the evaluation phase of SLN for EC, we performed LND and SLN and retrospectively compared the oncologic outcome with the immediate non-overlapping historical era during which patients underwent LND.

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2010, 193 patients underwent LND and from December 2010 to 2014, 250 patients had SLN mapping with completion LND. Both groups had similar clinical characteristics. During a median follow-up period of 6.9 years, addition of SLN was associated with more favorable oncological outcomes compared to LND with 6-year overall survival (OS) of 90% compared to 81% (p = 0.009), and progression free survival (PFS) of 85% compared to 75% (p = 0.01) respectively. SLN was associated with improved OS (HR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.8, p = 0.004), and PFS (HR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.9, p = 0.03) in a multivariable analysis, adjusted for age, ASA score, stage, grade, non-endometrioid histology, and LVSI. Patients who were staged with SLN were less likely to have a recurrence in the pelvis or lymph node basins compared to patients who underwent LND only (6-year recurrence-free survival 95% vs 90%, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Addition of SLN to LND was ultimately associated with improved clinical outcomes compared to LND alone in patients with endometrial cancer undergoing surgical staging, suggesting that the data provided by the analysis of the SLN added relevant clinical information, and improved the decision on adjuvant therapy.