Survival outcomes in endometrial cancer patients having lymphadenectomy, sentinel node mapping followed by lymphadectomy and sentinel node mapping alone: Long-term results of a propensity-matched analysis

A meta-analysis of the effect of pelvic and para-aortic lymph node dissection on the prognosis of patients with endometrial cancer

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the second most common malignant tumor of the female reproductive system, and it occurs in the peri- and post-menopausal periods. The metastasis routes of EC include direct spread, hematogenous metastasis and lymph node metastasis. Symptoms such as vaginal discharge or irregular vaginal bleeding may occur in the early stage. The pathological stage of the patients treated at this time is mostly in the early stage, and comprehensive treatment such as surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy can improve the prognosis. This article investigates whether endometrial cancer requires pelvic and para-aortic lymph node dissection. The clinical data of 228 patients with endometrial cancer who underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy in our hospital from July 2020 to September 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent preoperative clinical staging and postoperative pathological staging. This paper compared lymph node spread rates of endometrial carcinoma in different stages, depth of muscle invasion, and pathological characteristics to analyze lymph node metastasis risk factors. Results showed metastasis rates of 7.5% in 228 cases of endometrial cancer, increasing with deeper myometrial invasion. Different clinicopathological factors had varying lymph node spread rates. Different clinicopathological factors have different pelvic lymph node spread rates in surgical patients. The lymph node spread rate of differentially differentiated carcinoma is higher than that of well-differentiated carcinoma. The lymph node spread rate of serous carcinoma is 100%, but there is no difference between the lymph node metastasis rate of special type carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. Statistical significance (P > 0.05).

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.

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.

Recent management of endometrial cancer: a narrative review of the literature

Endometrial cancer is a common female gynecological neoplasia and its incidence rate has increased in the past years. Due to its predominant symptoms, most women will present uterine bleeding. It is usually diagnosed at an early stage and surgery has an important role in the treatment plan. The prognosis and quality of life of these patients can be quite favorable, if proper treatment is offered by surgeons. Traditionally, more invasive approaches and procedures were offered to these patients, but recent data suggest that more conservative and minimal invasive choices can be adopted in the treatment algorithm. Minimal invasive surgery, such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery, should be considered as an acceptable alternative, compared to laparotomy with less comorbidities and similar oncological and survival outcomes. Furthermore, sentinel lymph node biopsy has emerged in the surgical staging of endometrial cancer, in order to replace comprehensive lymphadenectomy. It is associated with less intra- and postoperative complications, while preliminary data show no difference in survival rates. However, sentinel lymph node biopsy should be offered within a strict algorithm, to avoid residual metastatic disease. The aim of this review is to analyze all the available data for the application of minimal invasive surgery in early endometrial cancer and especially the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy.

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.

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.

Comparing Surgical and Oncological Outcomes between Indocyanine Green (ICG) Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping with Routine Lymphadenectomy in the Surgical Staging of Early-Stage Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer

Methods

A retrospective single-centre cohort study of patients with early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer undergoing staging surgery (total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with/without pelvic lymph node, and/or para-aortic lymph node dissection (PLND)) with either SLN mapping or routine lymphadenectomy between July 2017 and December 2018.

Results

203 cases with clinical and radiological International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I endometrioid endometrial cancer were included, out of which 109 cases underwent SLN mapping and 94 cases complete lymphadenectomy. Compared to the PLND group, the SLN group had shorter operative time (129 vs. 162 minutes), less blood loss (100 vs. 300 ml), and decreased length of postoperative hospital stay (3 vs. 4 days) (p < 0.001). The lymph node metastases detection rate was 4.6% and 7.4% for the SLN and PLND groups, respectively (p = 0.389). With a median follow-up of 14 months for the SLN and 15 months for the PLND group, the disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were comparable for both at 13 months (p = 0.538 and p = 0.333, respectively).

Conclusion

SLN mapping has been shown to be an acceptable alternative to routine lymphadenectomy in the surgical staging of early-stage endometrial cancer in our centre, with a comparable lymph node metastases detection rate, DFS and OS, and reduction in operative morbidity. Our results with SLN mapping reproduce comparable outcomes to those reported in the literature.

Endometrial Cancer. Guideline of the DGGG, DKG and DKH (S3-Level, AWMF Registry Number 032/034-OL, September 2022) - Part 2 with Recommendations on the Therapy of Precancerous Lesions and Early-stage Endometrial Cancer, Surgical Therapy, Radiotherapy and Drug-based Therapy, Follow-up Care, Recurrence and Metastases, Psycho-oncological Care, Palliative Care, Patient Education, and Rehabilitative and Physiotherapeutic Care

Summary The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer, first published in April 2018, was reviewed in its entirety between April 2020 and January 2022 and updated. The review was carried out at the request of German Cancer Aid as part of the Oncology Guidelines Program and the lead coordinators were the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), the Gynecology Oncology Working Group (AGO) of the German Cancer Society (DKG) and the German Cancer Aid (DKH). The guideline update was based on a systematic search and assessment of the literature published between 2016 and 2020. All statements, recommendations and background texts were reviewed and either confirmed or amended. New statements and recommendations were included where necessary. Aim The use of evidence-based risk-adapted therapies to treat low-risk women with endometrial cancer prevents unnecessarily radical surgery and avoids non-beneficial adjuvant radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy. For women with endometrial cancer and a high risk of recurrence, the guideline defines the optimum level of radical surgery and indicates whether chemotherapy and/or adjuvant radiation therapy is necessary. This should improve the survival rates and quality of life of these patients. The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer and the quality indicators based on the guideline aim to provide the basis for the work of certified gynecological cancer centers. Methods The guideline was first compiled in 2018 in accordance with the requirements for S3-level guidelines and was updated in 2022. The update included an adaptation of the source guidelines identified using the German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal (DELBI). The update also used evidence reviews which were created based on selected literature obtained from systematic searches in selected literature databases using the PICO process. The Clinical Guidelines Service Group was tasked with carrying out a systematic search and assessment of the literature. Their results were used by interdisciplinary working groups as a basis for developing suggestions for recommendations and statements which were then modified during structured online consensus conferences and/or additionally amended online using the DELPHI process to achieve a consensus. Recommendations Part 2 of this short version of the guideline provides recommendations on the treatment of precancerous lesions and early-stage endometrial cancer, surgical treatment, radiotherapy and drug-based therapy, follow-up, recurrence, and metastasis of endometrial cancer as well as the state of psycho-oncological care, palliative care, patient education, rehabilitative and physiotherapeutic care.

Impact of sentinel lymph node assessment on the outcomes of patients with advanced endometrial cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) assessment is used to treat early endometrial cancer; however, its application in advanced endometrial cancer remains controversial. Therefore, we assessed the effects of SLN assessment and lymphadenectomy (LND) on the prognosis (survival rate and primary outcome) of patients with advanced endometrial cancer.

METHODS

Pertinent studies were selected from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until March 19, 2022. Relevant studies were strictly screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data from the included studies were extracted and their quality was evaluated. Then RevMan5.4 software was used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Four retrospective studies were included, which enrolled 7181 patients; 492 were treated with SLN and 6689 with LND. In terms of overall survival, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups (odds ratio = 1.14, 95% confidence interval: 0.92-1.41, I2 = 0%, P = .39).

CONCLUSIONS

SLN assessment is an alternative to LND as a treatment modality for advanced endometrial cancer.

AORTIC SENTINEL NODE DETECTION IN ENDOMETRIAL CANCER: 6 YEAR PROSPECTIVE STUDY

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe our final results using dual cervical and fundal indocyanine green injection for the detection of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in endometrial cancer along parametrial and infundibular drainage pathways.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study between 26 June 2014 and 31 December 2020 enrolling 332 patients that underwent laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer at our hospital. In all cases, we performed SLN biopsy with dual cervical and fundal indocyanine green injection identifying pelvic and aortic SLNs. All SLNs were processed with an ultrastaging technique. A total of 172 patients also underwent total pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy.

RESULTS

The detection rates were as follows: 94.0% overall for SLNs; 91.3% overall for pelvic SLNs; 70.5% for bilateral SLNs; 68.1% for para-aortic SLNs, and 3.0% for isolated paraaortic SLNs. We found lymph node involvement in 56 (16.9%) cases, macrometastasis in 22, micrometastasis in 12 and isolated tumor cells in 22. Fourteen patients had isolated aortic nodal involvement, representing 25% of the positive cases. There was one false negative (SLN biopsy negative but lymphadenectomy positive). Applying the SLN algorithm, the sensitivity of the dual injection technique for SLN detection was 98.3% (95% CI 91-99.7), specificity 100% (95% CI 98.5-100), negative predictive value 99.6% (95% CI 97.8-99.9), and positive predictive value 100% (95% CI 93.8-100). Overall survival at 60 months was 91.35%, with no differences between patients with negative nodes, isolated tumor cells and treated nodal micrometastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual sentinel node injection is a feasible technique that achieves adequate detection rates. Additionally, this technique allows a high rate of aortic detection, identifying a non-negligible percentage of isolated aortic metastases. Aortic metastases in endometrial cancer account for as many as a quarter of the positive cases and should be considered, especially in high-risk patients.

Role of Genomic and Molecular Biology in the Modulation of the Treatment of Endometrial Cancer: Narrative Review and Perspectives

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.

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.

Significance of positive peritoneal cytology for recurrence and survival in patients with endometrial cancer

AIM

This study aims to examine the association between malignant peritoneal cytology and prognosis in women with endometrial cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the records of patients with endometrial cancer who underwent surgery with intraoperative peritoneal cytology at our hospital between January 1988 and December 2012. All results were reclassified according to the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) system, and the relation between intraoperative peritoneal cytology results and recurrence and prognosis was examined.

RESULTS

Of the 908 patients analyzed, 205 (22.6%) had positive peritoneal cytology. Patients with positive peritoneal cytology had significantly lower rates of recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) than those in the negative cytology group (both p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis of patients with FIGO stage I/II showed significantly lower RFS in the positive-cytology group (p = 0.005), but there was no significant difference in OS (p = 0.637). In the patients with FIGO stage III/IV or patients classified as "high risk," the RFS and OS were significantly lower in the positive-cytology group (both p < 0.001). Cox regression analysis identified positive peritoneal cytology as a significant predictor of recurrence in patients with FIGO stage I/II disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with positive peritoneal cytology for endometrial cancer have a high risk of recurrence, regardless of histopathologic type or FIGO stage. Peritoneal cytology has already been removed from the 2009 FIGO classification of endometrial cancer, but it may deserve reconsideration.

Therapeutic Benefit of Systematic Lymphadenectomy in Node-Negative Uterine-Confined Endometrioid Endometrial Carcinoma: Omission of Adjuvant Therapy

Simple Summary

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological tract malignancy in developed countries. Extrauterine disease, in particular lymph node metastasis, is an important prognostic factor. Nevertheless, pelvic lymphadenectomy is not considered to have a therapeutic benefit, as it did not improve survival in randomized studies. However, lymphadenectomy may have a therapeutic benefit if adjuvant therapy can be omitted without decreasing oncological outcomes, as the long-term quality of life is maintained by avoiding morbidities associated with adjuvant therapy. In intermediate- and high-risk endometrioid endometrial carcinomas, adjuvant therapy may be safely omitted without decreasing long-term survival by open surgery including systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy when patients are node-negative. Systematic lymphadenectomy may remove undetectable low-volume lymph node metastasis in both pelvic and para-aortic regions, and open surgery may reduce vaginal recurrence even without vaginal brachytherapy. However, lymphadenectomy may not improve survival in elderly patients and patients with p53-mutant tumors.

Abstract

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological tract malignancy in developed countries, and its incidence has been increasing globally with rising obesity rates and longer life expectancy. In endometrial cancer, extrauterine disease, in particular lymph node metastasis, is an important prognostic factor. Nevertheless, pelvic lymphadenectomy is not considered to have a therapeutic benefit, as it did not improve survival in randomized studies. However, lymphadenectomy may have a therapeutic benefit if adjuvant therapy can be omitted without decreasing oncological outcomes, as the long-term quality of life is maintained by avoiding morbidities associated with adjuvant therapy. In intermediate- and high-risk endometrioid endometrial carcinomas, adjuvant therapy may be safely omitted without decreasing long-term survival by open surgery including systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy when patients are node-negative. Systematic lymphadenectomy may remove undetectable low-volume lymph node metastasis in both pelvic and para-aortic regions, and open surgery may reduce vaginal recurrence even without vaginal brachytherapy. However, lymphadenectomy may not improve survival in elderly patients and patients with p53-mutant tumors. In this review, I discuss the characteristics of lymph node metastasis, the methods of lymph node assessment, and the therapeutic benefits of systematic lymphadenectomy in patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrioid endometrial carcinoma.

Assessing the role of low volume disease in endometrial cancer

The role of retroperitoneal staging in endometrial cancer is still unclear. Although the prognostic value of lymphadenectomy has been demonstrated no data support the therapeutic value of nodal dissection. Sentinel node mapping represents an evolution of lymphadenectomy. Sentinel node mapping allows a more accurate identification of low-volume diseases (i.e., micrometastasis and isolated tumor cells) that are not always detectable via conventional histopathological evaluation. Adjuvant therapy might play a role in patients with low-volume disease. However, the presence of isolated tumor cells alone seems to not impact outcomes of endometrioid endometrial cancer patients. Hence, the choice to deliver adjuvant therapies has to be tailored based on uterine factors only. The introduction of molecular and genomic profiling would be useful in selecting appropriate surgical and adjuvant treatments. The molecular-integrated risk profile should be integrated in clinical practice to overcome the need of retroperitoneal staging (in case of non-bulky nodes) in patients at low risk.

The added value of SLN mapping with indocyanine green in low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancer management: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the SLN detection rate in presumed early stage, low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancers, the incidence of SLN metastases, and the negative predictive value of SLN mapping performed with indocyanine green (ICG).

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analyses was conducted. Study inclusion criteria were A) low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancer, B) the use of ICG per cervical injection; C) a minimum of twenty included patients per study. To assess the negative predictive value of SLN mapping, D) a subsequent lymphadenectomy was an additional inclusion criterion.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were selected, involving 2,117 patients. The overall and bilateral SLN detection rates were 95.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]=92.4%-97.9%) and 76.5% (95% CI=68.1%-84.0%), respectively. The incidence of SLN metastases was 9.6% (95% CI=5.1%-15.2%) in patients with grade 1-2 endometrial cancer and 11.8% (95% CI=8.1%-16.1%) in patients with grade 1-3 endometrial cancer. The negative predictive value of SLN mapping was 100% (95% CI=98.8%-100%) in studies that included grade 1-2 endometrial cancer and 99.2% (95% CI=97.9%-99.9%) in studies that also included grade 3.

CONCLUSION

SLN mapping with ICG is feasible with a high detection rate and negative predictive value in low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancers. Given the incidence of SLN metastases is approximately 10% in those patients, SLN mapping may lead to stage shifting with potential therapeutic consequences. Given the high negative predictive value with SLN mapping, routine lymphadenectomy should be omitted in low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancer.

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.

Overall survival after surgical staging by lymph node dissection versus sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer: a national cancer database study

OBJECTIVE

Substituting lymphadenectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy for staging purposes in endometrial cancer has raised concerns about incomplete nodal resection and detrimental oncological outcomes. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the association between the type of lymph node assessment and overall survival in endometrial cancer accounting for node status and histology.

METHODS

Women with stage I-III endometrial cancer who underwent hysterectomy and lymph node assessment from January 2012 to December 2015 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy, had previous cancer, and whose follow-up was less than 90 days were excluded. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to assess factors associated with overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 68 614 patients, 64 796 (94.4%) underwent lymphadenectomy, 1777 (2.6%) underwent sentinel node biopsy only, and 2041 (3.0%) underwent both procedures. On multivariable analysis, neither sentinel lymph node biopsy alone nor sentinel node biopsy followed by lymphadenectomy was associated with significantly different overall survival compared with lymphadenectomy alone (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.17, and HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.08, respectively). When stratified by lymph node status, sentinel node biopsy alone or followed by lymphadenectomy was not associated with different overall survival, both in patients with negative (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.24, and HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.27, respectively) or positive (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.52, and HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.04, respectively) lymph nodes. These findings held true when sentinel node biopsy alone and sentinel node biopsy plus lymphadenectomy groups were merged, and on stratification by histotype (type one vs type 2) or inclusion of only complete lymphadenectomy (at least 10 pelvic nodes and at least one para-aortic node removed). In all analyses, age, Charlson-Deyo score, black race, AJCC pathological T stage, grade, lymphovascular invasion, brachytherapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy were independently associated with overall survival.

DISCUSSION

No difference in overall survival was found in patients with endometrial cancer who underwent sentinel node biopsy alone, sentinel node biopsy followed by lymphadenectomy, or lymphadenectomy alone. This observation remained regardless of node status, histotype, and lymphadenectomy extent.

Factors predicting morbidity in surgically-staged high-risk endometrial cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

To investigate factors predicting the risk of developing 90-day postoperative complications and lymphatic-specific morbidity in patients undergoing surgical staging for high-risk endometrial cancer.

METHODS

This is a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study. Patients affected by apparent early-stage high-risk endometrial cancer (endometrioid FIGO grade 3 with deep myometrial invasion and non-endometrioid endometrial cancer) undergoing surgical staging between 2007 and 2019. Complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Martin criteria were applied to improve quality of complications reporting.

RESULTS

Charts of 279 patients were evaluated. Lymphadenectomy, sentinel node mapping (SNM), and SNM followed by back-up lymphadenectomy were performed in 83 (29.7%), 50 (17.9%), and 146 (52.4%) patients, respectively. The former group of patients included 13 patients who had lymphadenectomy after the failure of the SNM technique. Thirteen (4.6%) patients developed severe postoperative events (grade 3 or worse). At multivariate analysis, body mass index (OR: 1.08 (95%CI: 1.01, 1.17)) and open abdominal surgery (OR: 2.27 (95%CI: 1.02, 5.32)) were the two independent factors predictive of surgery-related morbidity. Seven severe lymphatic complications occurred. The adoption of laparoscopic approach (p < 0.001, log-rank test) and SNM (p = 0.038, log-rank test) correlated with a lower risk of developing surgery-related events. Independently, open abdominal surgery was associated with an increased risk of developing lymphatic morbidity (OR: 37.4 (95%CI: 4.38, 319.5); p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The adoption of the laparoscopic approach and SNM technique were associated with lower 90-day complication rates than open surgery in high-risk endometrial cancer undergoing staging surgery.

short review of current implementations of sentinel lymph node mapping in gynecologic cancers

Lymph node metastasis both increases disease stage and alters adjuvant treatment plans in gynecologic cancers. Since a minority of the patients have nodal metastasis, many patients unnecessarily undergo complete lymphadenectomy and are exposed to the subsequent morbidities. Sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping is an alternative for evaluation of lymph nodes with lesser side effects. Although it is yet an experimental approach in ovarian cancer, it has been incorporated into guidelines for endometrial, cervical and vulvar cancers. We aimed to summarize the current situation of SLN mapping in gynecologic cancers.

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.

Maximizing sentinel node detection in endometrial cancer with dual cervical and transcervical fundal indocyanine green injection: 5-year single-center prospective study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe our latest results using dual cervical and fundal indocyanine green injection for detection of sentinel lymph node (SLN) in endometrial cancer.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted between 26 June 2014 and 31 December 2019 with 278 patients that underwent laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer at our institution. In all cases, we performed SLN biopsy with dual cervical and fundal indocyanine green injection. All SLNs were processed with an ultrastaging technique. A total of 128 patients also underwent total pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy.

RESULTS

The detection rates were as follows: 93.5 % (260/278) overall for SLNs; 90.7 % (252/278) overall for pelvic SLNs; 68.0 % (189/278) for bilateral SLNs; 66.9 % (186/278) for paraaortic SLNs, and 2.9 % (8/278) for isolated paraaortic SLNs. We found macroscopic lymph node metastasis in 26 patients (10.0 %) and microdisease in lymph nodes in another 48 patients, raising the overall rate of lymph node involvement to 16.2 %. There was one false negative (negative SLN biopsy but positive lymphadenectomy). Applying the SLN algorithm, the sensitivity of detection was 97.9 % (95 % CI 89.1-99.6), specificity 100 % (95 % CI 98.2-100), negative predictive value 99.5 % (95 % CI 97.4-99.9), and positive predictive value 100 % (95 % CI 92.4-100).

CONCLUSIONS

Dual sentinel node injection is a feasible technique that achieves adequate detection rates. Additionally, this technique allows a high rate of aortic detection, identifying a non-negligible percentage of isolated aortic metastases. Aortic metastases in endometrial cancer are possible and we should not give up actively looking for them.

The impact of sentinel lymph node sampling versus traditional lymphadenectomy on the survival of patients with stage IIIC endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the survival of patients with lymph node positive endometrial carcinoma by type of surgical lymph node assessment.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed between January 2012 and December 2015 with endometrial carcinoma and uterine confined disease and nodal metastases on final pathology who underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy were identified in the National Cancer Database. Patients who had sentinel lymph node biopsy alone or underwent systematic lymphadenectomy were selected. Overall survival was evaluated following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log rank test. A Cox model was constructed to evaluate survival after controlling for confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 1432 patients were identified: 1323 (92.4%) and 109 (7.6%) underwent systematic lymphadenectomy and sentinel lymph node biopsy only, respectively. The rate of adjuvant treatment was comparable between patients who had sentinel lymph node biopsy alone and systematic lymphadenectomy (83.5% vs 86.6%, p=0.39). However, patients who had sentinel lymph node biopsy were less likely to receive chemotherapy alone (13.6% vs 36.6%, p<0.001) and more likely to receive radiation therapy alone (19.8% vs 5.4%, p<0.001) compared with patients who had systematic lymphadenectomy. There was no difference in overall survival between patients who had sentinel lymph node biopsy alone and systematic lymphadenectomy (p=0.27 from log rank test), and 3 year overall survival rates were 82.2% and 79.4%, respectively (p>0.05). After controlling for confounders, there was no difference in survival between the systematic lymphadenectomy and sentinel lymph node biopsy alone groups (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 1.45).

CONCLUSIONS

Performance of sentinel lymph node biopsy alone was not associated with an adverse impact on survival in patients with lymph node positive endometrial cancer.

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.

Lymph node evaluation in endometrial cancer: how did it change over the last two decades?

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecological malignancy in developed countries, and surgery represents the pivotal part of treatment. Hysterectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy allow removing the primary tumor and defining patients at higher risk, who might benefit from adjuvant therapies. Minimally invasive surgery is associated with superior postoperative outcomes and represents a safe and effective approach for surgical staging of EC. The lymph node status evaluation in EC is still a matter of debate. Over the last twenty years much has changed, moving from a full systematic pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy for staging purpose to the removal of the pelvic (with or without paraaortic) lymph nodes only in selected EC classes of risk. Two randomized trials failed to demonstrate survival benefits of lymphadenectomy in case of apparent early stage EC; however, its prognostic role has never been questioned. At present, with the aim of reducing the surgical-related morbidity, sentinel node mapping is emerging as a safe and valid alternative to lymphadenectomy for EC staging, demonstrating high accuracy and an increased detection of lymph nodes metastasis. Here, we performed a review of the most significant studies, which supported the changes in the lymph node status evaluation for EC over the last two decades.

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.

Hysteroscopic versus cervical injection for sentinel node detection in endometrial cancer: A multicenter prospective randomised controlled trial from the Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer (MITO) study group

AIM

During the last years, the role of sentinel lymph node mapping (SLNM) for endometrial cancer (EC) surgical treatment has increased in popularity. However, several controversies remain about different technical steps of SLNM. Thus, a randomised control trial was designed to compare cervical (CI) and hysteroscopic (HI) indocyanine green (ICG) injection for SLNM of newly diagnosed EC undergoing surgical staging. The primary end-point of the study was to compare these two techniques in terms of para-aortic detection rate.

METHODS

Patients with apparent stage I or II histologically confirmed EC undergoing surgery were included in the study. This randomised trial distinguished patients in two study groups according to two different techniques of ICG SLNM: CI versus HI injection. Patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to CI or HI injection in a 1:1 ratio. The central randomisation system allocated patient randomisation numbers sequentially in the order in which the patients were enrolled. This randomised trial was not blinded for either patients or the surgeons.

RESULTS

From March 2017 until April 2019, a total of 165 patients were randomised in this study: 85 (51.5%) in the CI group and 80 (48.5%) in the HI group. After randomisation, 14 (8.5%) patients were excluded from the study. Finally, 151 patients were included in the analysis: 82 (54.3%) in the CI group and 69 (45.7%) in the HI group. Hysteroscopy injection shows an ability to detect Sentinel nodes (SNLs) in the para-aortic area of about 10% greater compared with CI injection, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. The HI technique was superior in detecting isolated para-aortic SLNs (5.8% Versus 0%). The CI injection was correlated with higher SLN detection rates at the pelvic level compared with HI injection. Pelvic and overall detection was higher in the CI group.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study supports the adoption of CI instead of HI injection because the former allows better identification of sentinel nodes (especially in the pelvic area). Detection of SLN in the para-aortic area was slightly higher in patients receiving a HI injection, but the difference with the CI route was not statistically significant.

Sentinel lymph node intraoperative analysis in endometrial cancer

PURPOSE

Surgical staging in endometrial cancer has evolved and sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping has replaced a full pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in several cases. An intraoperative evaluation of SLN might identify patients who could benefit the most from a full lymphadenectomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical relevance of frozen section of SLN.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis in patients with endometrial cancer who underwent SLN mapping with intraoperative evaluation at frozen section between February 2016 and September 2019 was performed. In case of metastatic involvement, a full lymphadenectomy was performed.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria. Clinical-pathologic characteristics of the patients and surgical data were analyzed. Overall, bilateral and unilateral detection rates were 100% (58/58), 89.7% (52/58), and 10.3% (6/58), respectively. Eight patients had a stage IIIC disease at permanent section. Frozen section detected SLN metastases in four of eight patients. Of these, two were micrometastases and two were macrometastases. At frozen section of the SLNs, no macrometastases were misdiagnosed. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of frozen section in detecting metastases was 50%, 100%, 93%, 100% and 92.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The intraoperative evaluation of SLN in endometrial cancer accurately identifies patients with macrometastases. This is the cohort that might benefit the most of a full lymphadenectomy for a higher risk of additional lymph node metastases.

Patterns of failure after adjuvant "sandwich" chemo-radio-chemotherapy in locally advanced (stage III-IVA) endometrial cancer

PURPOSE

To investigate oncological outcomes and patterns of recurrence of patients undergoing adjuvant "sandwich" chemo-radio-chemotherapy for locally advanced endometrial cancer.

METHODS

This is a multi-institutional retrospective study evaluating chart of consecutive patients undergoing chemo-radio-chemotherapy for FIGO stage III-IVA endometrial caner.

RESULTS

The study population included 45 patients who had adjuvant sandwich regimen. Median age of the study population was 66 years. The majority of patients were diagnosed with endometrioid histology and with stage III disease. After a median follow-up of 35 months, 15 patients developed recurrent disease. Three-year disease-free and overall survivals was 45% and 81%, respectively. Three-years site-specific disease-free survival was 85%, 92% and 48% for local, loco-regional, and distant recurrence, respectively. All patients included in the study had nodal dissection. Nodal assessment included: sentinel node mapping, sentinel node mapping plus backup lymphadenectomy and lymphadenectomy in 15, 6 and 24 patients, respectively. The latter group included four patients detected by suspected enlarged nodes, intraoperatively. Even after the exclusion of patients with enlarged nodes, the type of nodal assessment did not impact on survival outcomes (p > 0.2). Positive peritoneal cytology was the only factor associated with an increased risk of developing (any site) recurrence and distant-specific recurrence, independently. No factor predicted for overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant "sandwich" chemo-radio-chemotherapy for locally advanced endometrial cancer guarantee promising local and loco-regional controls, but distant failure rate is high, thus suggesting the need for applying other systemic treatment strategies for these patients.

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.