1
|
Cuccu I, Raspagliesi F, Malzoni M, Vizza E, Papadia A, Di Donato V, Giannini A, De Iaco P, Perrone AM, Plotti F, Angioli R, Casarin J, Ghezzi F, Cianci S, Vizzielli G, Restaino S, Petrillo M, Sorbi F, Multinu F, Schivardi G, De Vitis LA, Falcone F, Lalli L, Berretta R, Mueller MD, Tozzi R, Chiantera V, Benedetti Panici P, Fanfani F, Scambia G, Bogani G. Sentinel node mapping in high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer: Analysis of 5-year oncologic outcomes. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2024; 50:108018. [PMID: 38428106 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2023] [Revised: 01/10/2024] [Accepted: 02/10/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilaria Cuccu
- Gynecologic Oncologic Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano, Italy; Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, 'Sapienza' University of Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Raspagliesi
- Gynecologic Oncologic Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano, Italy
| | - Mario Malzoni
- Endoscopica Malzoni, Center for Advanced Endoscopic Gynecological Surgery, Avellino, Italy
| | - Enrico Vizza
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, IRCSS-Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Papadia
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, EOC-Civico Hospital, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland; Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera Italiana, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Violante Di Donato
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, 'Sapienza' University of Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Giannini
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, 'Sapienza' University of Rome, Italy
| | - Pierandrea De Iaco
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Unit of Oncologic Gynecology, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Anna Myriam Perrone
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Unit of Oncologic Gynecology, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Francesco Plotti
- Department of Gynecology, Campus Bio-Medico University Hospital Foundation, Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Angioli
- Department of Gynecology, Campus Bio-Medico University Hospital Foundation, Rome, Italy
| | - Jvan Casarin
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Filippo Del Ponte' Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Fabio Ghezzi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Filippo Del Ponte' Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Stefano Cianci
- Department of Human Pathology of Adult and Childhood "G. Barresi", Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Vizzielli
- Department of Medical Area (DAME), University of Udine, Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Santa Maria Della Misericordia" University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Stefano Restaino
- Department of Medical Area (DAME), University of Udine, Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Santa Maria Della Misericordia" University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Marco Petrillo
- Gynecologic and Obstetric Clinic, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Pharmacy, University of Sassari, 07100, Sassari, Italy
| | - Flavia Sorbi
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Francesco Multinu
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | | | | | - Francesca Falcone
- Endoscopica Malzoni, Center for Advanced Endoscopic Gynecological Surgery, Avellino, Italy
| | - Luca Lalli
- Gynecologic Oncologic Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano, Italy
| | - Roberto Berretta
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Michael D Mueller
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Roberto Tozzi
- Division of Women and Children's Health, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University of Padua, 35122, Padua, Italy
| | - Vito Chiantera
- Gynaecologic Oncology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori di Napoli IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale", Naples, Italy
| | | | - Francesco Fanfani
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Department of Women, Children and Public Health Sciences, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Giovanni Scambia
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Department of Women, Children and Public Health Sciences, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Giorgio Bogani
- Gynecologic Oncologic Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bharathan R, Polterauer S, Lopez-Sanclemente MC, Trukhan H, Pletnev A, Heredia AG, Gil MM, Bakinovskaya I, Dalamanava A, Romeo M, Rovski D, Baquedano L, Chiva L, Schwameis R, Zapardiel I, On Behalf Of Sarcut Study Group. Prognostic Value of Lymph Node Ratio in Patients with Uterine Carcinosarcoma. J Pers Med 2024; 14:155. [PMID: 38392588 PMCID: PMC10890673 DOI: 10.3390/jpm14020155] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2023] [Revised: 11/13/2023] [Accepted: 11/25/2023] [Indexed: 02/24/2024] Open
Abstract
Uterine carcinosarcoma is a rare high-grade endometrial cancer. Controversy has surrounded a number of aspects in the diagnosis and management of this unique clinicopathological entity, including the efficacy of adjuvant therapy, which has been questioned. An unusual surgico-pathological parameter with prognostic significance in a number of tumour sites is the lymph node ratio (LNR). The availability of data in this respect has been scarce in the literature. The primary aim of this collaborative study was to evaluate the prognostic value of LNR in patients with uterine carcinosarcoma. LNR is a recognized lymph node metric used to stratify prognosis in a variety of malignancies. In this European multinational retrospective study, 93 women with uterine carcinosarcoma were included in the final analysis. We used t-tests and ANOVA for comparison between quantitative variables between the groups, and chi-square tests for qualitative variables. A multivariate analysis using Cox regression analysis was performed to determine potential prognostic factors, including the LNR. Patients were grouped with respect to LNR in terms of 0%, 20% > 0% and >20%. The analysis revealed LNR to be a significant predictor of progression-free survival (HR 1.69, CI (1.12-2.55), p = 0.012) and overall survival (HR 1.71, CI (1.07-2.7), p = 0.024). However, LNR did not remain a significant prognostic factor on multivariate analysis. Due to limitations of the retrospective study, a prospective large multinational study, which takes into effect the most recent changes to clinical practice, is warranted to elucidate the value of the pathophysiological metrics of the lymphatic system associated with prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rasiah Bharathan
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | - Stephan Polterauer
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Hanna Trukhan
- N.N. Alexandrov National Cancer Center, 223040 Minsk, Belarus
| | - Andrei Pletnev
- N.N. Alexandrov National Cancer Center, 223040 Minsk, Belarus
| | - Angel G Heredia
- Clinica de Especialidades de la Mujer, Mexico City 03810, Mexico
| | - Maria M Gil
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, 28046 Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | - Margarita Romeo
- Instituto Catalan de Oncologia Badalona, 08916 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Dzmitry Rovski
- N.N. Alexandrov National Cancer Center, 223040 Minsk, Belarus
| | | | - Luis Chiva
- Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, 28027 Madrid, Spain
| | - Richard Schwameis
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | - Ignacio Zapardiel
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, 28046 Madrid, Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bogani G, Giannini A, Vizza E, Di Donato V, Raspagliesi F. Sentinel node mapping in endometrial cancer. J Gynecol Oncol 2024; 35:e29. [PMID: 37973163 PMCID: PMC10792208 DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2024.35.e29] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2023] [Revised: 09/19/2023] [Accepted: 10/26/2023] [Indexed: 11/19/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giorgio Bogani
- Gynecological Oncology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milano, Italy
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
| | - Andrea Giannini
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Enrico Vizza
- Unit of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Violante Di Donato
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Raspagliesi
- Gynecological Oncology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Collet L, González López AM, Romeo C, Méeus P, Chopin N, Rossi L, Rowinski E, Serre AA, Rannou C, Buisson A, Treilleux I, Ray-Coquard I. Gynecological carcinosarcomas: Overview and future perspectives. Bull Cancer 2023; 110:1215-1226. [PMID: 37679206 DOI: 10.1016/j.bulcan.2023.07.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2023] [Revised: 06/28/2023] [Accepted: 07/09/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023]
Abstract
Gynecologic carcinosarcoma (CS) are rare and aggressive tumors composed of high-grade carcinoma and sarcoma. Carcinosarcoma account for less than 5% of uterine and ovarian carcinoma and patients have poor outcome with a 5-year overall survival of less than 30%. In early-stage setting, the treatment mainstay is surgery and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy or adjuvant chemotherapy in uterine (UCS) and ovarian CS (OCS), respectively. In metastatic or advanced stage disease, chemotherapy is the rule with a lower response rate and poorer prognosis compared to other high-grade carcinomas. Although very few treatment options are available, CS are often excluded from the clinical trials precluding therapeutic improvement. However, recent molecular advances are paving the way for new therapeutic strategies. In the current proposal, we extensively review the uterine and ovarian carcinosarcomas including epidemiology, pathology, genomic landscape, as well as current therapies and future perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laetitia Collet
- Institut Jules-Bordet, Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Bruxelles, Belgium; Institut Jules-Bordet, Department of Medical Oncology, Bruxelles, Belgium; Centre Leon-Berard, Department of Medical Oncology, Lyon, France.
| | | | - Clémence Romeo
- Centre Leon-Berard, Department of Medical Oncology, Lyon, France
| | - Pierre Méeus
- Centre Leon-Berard, Department of Surgery, Lyon, France
| | | | - Léa Rossi
- Centre Leon-Berard, Department of Surgery, Lyon, France
| | - Elise Rowinski
- Centre Leon-Berard, Department of Medical Oncology, Lyon, France
| | | | | | - Adrien Buisson
- Centre Leon-Berard, Department of Biology molecular, Lyon, France
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Nahshon C, Kadan Y, Lavie O, Ostrovsky L, Segev Y. Sentinel lymph node sampling versus full lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer: a SEER database analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2023; 33:1557-1563. [PMID: 37487660 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004474] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/26/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess the long term outcomes and prognosis of sentinel lymph node sampling compared with full lymph node dissection in endometrial cancer patients. METHODS We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database for information on women diagnosed with endometrial cancer from 2010 to 2019. We conducted a comparison including overall survival between patients who had undergone sentinel lymph node sampling only and patients who had undergone formal lymph node dissection. Propensity score matching was performed according to the patient's age, type of endometrial cancer, grade and stage of disease, and adjuvant therapy. Subgroup analyses were performed according to type and grade of endometrial cancer. RESULTS 41411 endometrial cancer patients were identified through the database. After matching, 6019 patients each were included in the sentinel lymph node and lymph node dissection groups. Median (interquartile range (IQR)) follow-up time was 16 (7-31) months in both groups. One year survival rates were longer in the sentinel lymph node group compared with the lymph node dissection group (hazard ratio (HR) 1.61 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 2.21); p=0.004). Subgroups analysis according to grade of disease showed that 1 year survival rates were longer in the sentinel lymph node group in patients with endometrioid-type grade 1-2 endometrial cancer (HR 1.70 (95% CI 1.31 to 2.56); p=0.01), while no difference in survival was found between the sentinel lymph node and lymph node dissection groups in the subgroup of patients with high grade endometrial cancer (HR 1.40 (95%CI 0.94 to 2.24); p=0.17). In patients with low grade endometrial cancer included in the sentinel lymph node group, only 7% had lymph nodes positive for malignancy compared with 17% in the high grade group. CONCLUSION Survival rates were not compromised in endometrial cancer patients undergoing sentinel lymph node sampling versus full lymph node dissection for all grades of disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chen Nahshon
- Division for Gynecological Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
- Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| | - Yfat Kadan
- Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
- Division for Gynecological Oncology, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Haemek Medical Center, Afula, Israel
| | - Ofer Lavie
- Division for Gynecological Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
- Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| | - Ludmila Ostrovsky
- Division for Gynecological Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
- Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| | - Yakir Segev
- Division for Gynecological Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
- Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sia TY, Basaran D, Dagher C, Sassine D, Brandt B, Rosalik K, Mueller JJ, Broach V, Makker V, Soslow RA, Abu-Rustum NR, Leitao MM. Laparoscopy with or without robotic assistance does not negatively impact long-term oncologic outcomes in patients with uterine serous carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2023; 175:8-14. [PMID: 37267674 PMCID: PMC10526750 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.05.064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Revised: 05/11/2023] [Accepted: 05/20/2023] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We sought to compare outcomes between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and laparotomy in patients with clinical stage I uterine serous carcinoma (USC). METHODS Patients who underwent surgery for newly diagnosed USC between 11/1/1993 and 12/31/2017 were retrospectively identified and assigned to either the MIS cohort or the laparotomy cohort. Patients with conversion to laparotomy were analyzed with the MIS cohort. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate survival and compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS In total, 391 patients met inclusion criteria; 242 underwent MIS (35% non-robotic and 65% robotic-assisted laparoscopies) and 149 underwent laparotomy. Age, BMI, stage, and washings status did not differ between cohorts. Patients who underwent MIS were less likely to have lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI; 35.1% vs 48.3%), had fewer nodes removed (median, 9 vs 15), and lower rates of paraaortic nodal dissection (44.6% vs 65.1%). Rates of adjuvant therapy did not differ between cohorts. Median follow-up times were 63.0 months (MIS cohort) vs 71.0 months (laparotomy cohort; P = .04). Five-year PFS rates were 58.7% (MIS) vs 59.8% (laparotomy; P = .1). Five-year OS rates were 65.2% (MIS) compared to 63.5% (laparotomy; P = .2). On multivariable analysis, higher stage, deep myometrial invasion, and positive washings were associated with decreased PFS. Age ≥ 65 years, higher stage, LVSI, and positive washings were associated with shorter OS. CONCLUSIONS MIS does not compromise outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed USC and should be offered to these patients to minimize surgical morbidity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tiffany Y Sia
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Derman Basaran
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Christian Dagher
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Dib Sassine
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Benny Brandt
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Kendall Rosalik
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Jennifer J Mueller
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America; Department of OB/GYN, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Vance Broach
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America; Department of OB/GYN, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Vicky Makker
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America; Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Robert A Soslow
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Nadeem R Abu-Rustum
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America; Department of OB/GYN, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Mario M Leitao
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America; Department of OB/GYN, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Holtzman S, Stoffels G, Flint M, Carr C, Prasad-Hayes M, Zeligs K, Blank SV. Outcomes for patients with high-risk endometrial cancer undergoing sentinel lymph node assessment versus full lymphadenectomy. Gynecol Oncol 2023; 174:273-277. [PMID: 37270906 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2023] [Revised: 04/25/2023] [Accepted: 05/01/2023] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sharonne Holtzman
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, United States of America.
| | - Guillaume Stoffels
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, United States of America
| | - Matt Flint
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, United States of America
| | - Caitlin Carr
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, United States of America
| | - Monica Prasad-Hayes
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, United States of America
| | - Kristen Zeligs
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, United States of America
| | - Stephanie V Blank
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bogani G, Di Donato V, Papadia A, Buda A, Casarin J, Multinu F, Plotti F, Gasparri ML, Pinelli C, Perrone AM, Ferrero S, Sorbi F, Landoni F, Palaia I, Perniola G, De Iaco P, Cianci S, Alletti SG, Petrillo M, Vizzielli G, Fanfani F, Angioli R, Muzii L, Ghezzi F, Vizza E, Mueller MD, Scambia G, Panici PB, Raspagliesi F. Hysterectomy alone vs. hysterectomy plus sentinel node mapping in endometrial cancer: Perioperative and long-term results from a propensity-score based study. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2023; 49:1037-1043. [PMID: 36801150 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.02.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2022] [Revised: 01/11/2023] [Accepted: 02/12/2023] [Indexed: 02/15/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giorgio Bogani
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy.
| | - Violante Di Donato
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Papadia
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, University' of Italian Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Alessandro Buda
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Michele e Pietro Ferrero Hospital, 12060, Verduno, Italy
| | - Jvan Casarin
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Filippo Del Ponte' Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Francesco Multinu
- Division of Gynecologic Surgery, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Plotti
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Campus Biomedico of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Maria Luisa Gasparri
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, University' of Italian Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Ciro Pinelli
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Filippo Del Ponte' Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Anna Myriam Perrone
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Sant'Orsola Malpighi University Hospital University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| | - Simone Ferrero
- Academic Unit of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy; Department of Neurosciences, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health (DiNOGMI), University of Genova, Italy
| | - Flavia Sorbi
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Fabio Landoni
- Gynecology Oncology Surgical Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Gerardo Hospital, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy
| | - Innocenza Palaia
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Giorgia Perniola
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Pierandrea De Iaco
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Sant'Orsola Malpighi University Hospital University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| | - Stefano Cianci
- Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Rome, Italy
| | - Salvatore Gueli Alletti
- Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Petrillo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Sardegna, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Vizzielli
- Department of Medical Area (DAME), University of Udine, Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Santa Maria Della Misericordia" University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Francesco Fanfani
- Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Angioli
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Campus Biomedico of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Ludovico Muzii
- Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy
| | - Fabio Ghezzi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Filippo Del Ponte' Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Enrico Vizza
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, 00144, Rome, Italy
| | - Michael D Mueller
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital of Bern and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Giovanni Scambia
- Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Francesco Raspagliesi
- Gynecological Oncology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Bogani G, Ray-Coquard I, Concin N, Ngoi NYL, Morice P, Caruso G, Enomoto T, Takehara K, Denys H, Lorusso D, Coleman R, Vaughan MM, Takano M, Provencher DM, Sagae S, Wimberger P, Póka R, Segev Y, Kim SI, Kim JW, Candido Dos Reis FJ, Ramirez PT, Mariani A, Leitao M, Makker V, Abu-Rustum NR, Vergote I, Zannoni G, Tan D, McCormack M, Paolini B, Bini M, Raspagliesi F, Benedetti Panici P, Di Donato V, Muzii L, Colombo N, Pignata S, Scambia G, Monk BJ. Endometrial carcinosarcoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2023; 33:147-174. [PMID: 36585027 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2022-004073] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Endometrial carcinosarcoma is a rare and aggressive high-grade endometrial carcinoma with secondary sarcomatous trans-differentiation (conversion theory). The clinical presentation and diagnostic work-up roughly align with those of the more common endometrioid counterpart, although endometrial carcinosarcoma is more frequently diagnosed at an advanced stage. Endometrial carcinosarcoma is not a single entity but encompasses different histological subtypes, depending on the type of carcinomatous and sarcomatous elements. The majority of endometrial carcinosarcomas are characterized by p53 abnormalities. The proportion of POLE and microsatellite instablity-high (MSI-H) is directly related to the epithelial component, being approximately 25% and 3% in endometrioid and non-endometrioid components.The management of non-metastatic disease is based on a multimodal approach with optimal surgery followed by (concomitant or sequential) chemotherapy and radiotherapy, even for early stages. Palliative chemotherapy is recommended in the metastatic or recurrent setting, with carboplatin/paclitaxel doublet being the first-line regimen. Although the introduction of immunotherapy plus/minus a tyrosine kinase inhibitor shifted the paradigm of treatment of patients with recurrent endometrial cancer, patients with endometrial carcinosarcoma were excluded from most studies evaluating single-agent immunotherapy or the combination. However, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) approved the use of pembrolizumab and lenvatinib in endometrial cancer (all histotypes) after progression on chemotherapy and single-agent immunotherapy in MSI-H cancers. In the era of precision medicine, emerging knowledge on molecular endometrial carcinosarcoma is opening new promising therapeutic options for more personalized treatment. The present review outlines state-of-the-art knowledge and future directions for patients with endometrial carcinosarcoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giorgio Bogani
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano, Italy
| | | | - Nicole Concin
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics; Innsbruck Medical Univeristy, Innsbruck, Austria
| | | | - Philippe Morice
- Department of Surgery, Institut Gustave RoussT, Villejuif, France
| | - Giuseppe Caruso
- Department of Maternal and Child Health and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy
| | - Takayuki Enomoto
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Belgium
| | - Kazuhiro Takehara
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, National Hospital Organization Shikoku Cancer Center, Matsuyama, Japan
| | - Hannelore Denys
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Ghent, Gent, Belgium
| | | | - Robert Coleman
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Michelle M Vaughan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Canterbury Regional Cancer and Haematology Service, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Masashi Takano
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa, Medical, Japan
| | | | | | - Pauline Wimberger
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technische Universitat Dresden Medizinische Fakultat Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | | | - Yakir Segev
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Carmel Hospital, Haifa, Israel
| | - Se Ik Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jae-Weon Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | | | - Pedro T Ramirez
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Andrea Mariani
- Department of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Mario Leitao
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Vicky Makker
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Nadeem R Abu-Rustum
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Ignace Vergote
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Gynecologic Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Catholic University Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Gianfranco Zannoni
- Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna e del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - David Tan
- National University Cancer Institute, Singapore
| | - Mary McCormack
- Department of Oncology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Biagio Paolini
- Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, Milano, Italy
| | - Marta Bini
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano, Lombardia, Italy
| | | | | | - Violante Di Donato
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Sapienza of Roma, Rome, Italy
| | - Ludovico Muzii
- Department of Maternal, Infantile, and Urological Sciences, Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Nicoletta Colombo
- Medical Gynecologic Oncology Unit; University of Milan Bicocca; Milan; Italy, European Institute of Oncology, Milano, Italy
| | - Sandro Pignata
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, National Cancer Institute Napels, Naples, Italy
| | - Giovanni Scambia
- Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna e del Bambino, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| | - Bradley J Monk
- HonorHealth, University of Arizona, Creighton University, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| |
Collapse
|