Stage II endometrial carcinoma

Lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a previous Cochrane review published in Issue 1, 2010 and updated in Issue 9, 2015. The role of lymphadenectomy in surgical management of endometrial cancer remains controversial. Lymph node metastases can be found in approximately 10% of women who before surgery are thought to have cancer confined to the womb. Removal of all pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes (lymphadenectomy) at initial surgery has been widely advocated, and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy remains part of the FIGO (International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics) staging system for endometrial cancer. This recommendation is based on data from studies that suggested improvement in survival following pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. However, these studies were not randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and treatment of pelvic lymph nodes may not confer a direct therapeutic benefit, other than allocating women to poorer prognosis groups. Furthermore, the Cochrane review and meta-analysis of RCTs of routine adjuvant radiotherapy to treat possible lymph node metastases in women with early-stage endometrial cancer found no survival advantage. Surgical removal of pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes has serious potential short-term and long-term sequelae. Therefore, it is important to investigate the clinical value of this treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase to June 2009 for the original review, updated the search to June 2015 for the last updated version and further extended the search to March 2017 for this version of the review. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, and reference lists of included studies, and we contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and quasi-RCTs that compared lymphadenectomy versus no lymphadenectomy in adult women diagnosed with endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Hazard ratios (HRs) for overall and progression-free survival and risk ratios (RRs) comparing adverse events in women who received lymphadenectomy versus those with no lymphadenectomy were pooled in random-effects meta-analyses. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

978 unique references were identified via the search strategy. All but 50 were excluded by title and abstract screening. Three RCTs met the inclusion criteria; for one small RCT, data were insufficient for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The two RCTs included in the analysis randomly assigned 1945 women, reported HRs for survival adjusted for prognostic factors and based on 1851 women and had an overall low risk of bias, as they satisfied four of the assessment criteria. The third study had an overall unclear risk of bias, as information provided was not adequate concerning random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, or completeness of outcome reporting.Results of the meta-analysis remained unchanged from the previous versions of this review and indicated no differences in overall and recurrence-free survival between women who underwent lymphadenectomy and those who did not undergo lymphadenectomy (pooled hazard ratio (HR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.43; HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.58 for overall and recurrence-free survival, respectively) (1851 participants, two studies; moderate-quality evidence).We found no difference in risk of direct surgical morbidity between women who underwent lymphadenectomy and those who did not undergo lymphadenectomy. However, women who underwent lymphadenectomy had a significantly higher risk of surgery-related systemic morbidity and lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation than those who did not undergo lymphadenectomy (RR 3.72, 95% CI 1.04 to 13.27; RR 8.39, 95% CI 4.06 to 17.33 for risk of surgery-related systemic morbidity and lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation, respectively) (1922 participants, two studies; high-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found no evidence that lymphadenectomy decreases risk of death or disease recurrence compared with no lymphadenectomy in women with presumed stage I disease. Evidence on serious adverse events suggests that women who undergo lymphadenectomy are more likely to experience surgery-related systemic morbidity or lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation. Currently, no RCT evidence shows the impact of lymphadenectomy in women with higher-stage disease and in those at high risk of disease recurrence.

Lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a previous Cochrane review published in Issue 1, 2010. The role of lymphadenectomy in surgical management of endometrial cancer remains controversial. Lymph node metastases can be found in approximately 10% of women who clinically before surgery have cancer confined to the womb. Removal of all pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes (lymphadenectomy) at initial surgery has been widely advocated, and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy remains part of the FIGO (International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics) staging system for endometrial cancer. This recommendation is based on data from studies that suggested improvement in survival following pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. However, these studies were not randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and treatment of pelvic lymph nodes may not confer a direct therapeutic benefit, other than allocating women to poorer prognosis groups. Furthermore, the Cochrane review and meta-analysis of RCTs of routine adjuvant radiotherapy to treat possible lymph node metastases in women with early-stage endometrial cancer found no survival advantage. Surgical removal of pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes has serious potential short-term and long-term sequelae. Therefore it is important to investigate the clinical value of this treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Review Group Trials Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE to June 2009 for the original review and extended the search to June 2015 for this version of the review. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists of included studies, and we contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and quasi-RCTs that compared lymphadenectomy versus no lymphadenectomy in adult women diagnosed with endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Hazard ratios (HRs) for overall and progression-free survival and risk ratios (RRs) comparing adverse events in women who received lymphadenectomy versus those with no lymphadenectomy were pooled in random-effects meta-analyses. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Three RCTs met the inclusion criteria; for one small RCT, data were insufficient for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The two RCTs included in the analysis randomly assigned 1945 women, reported HRs for survival adjusted for prognostic factors and based on 1851 women and had an overall low risk of bias, as they satisfied four of the assessment criteria. The third study had an overall unclear risk of bias, as information provided was not adequate concerning random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding or completeness of outcome reporting.Results of the meta-analysis remain unchanged from the previous version of this review and indicate no differences in overall and recurrence-free survival between women who underwent lymphadenectomy and those who did not undergo lymphadenectomy (pooled HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.43; HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.58 for overall and recurrence-free survival, respectively) (1851 participants, two studies; moderate-quality evidence).We found no difference in risk of direct surgical morbidity between women who underwent lymphadenectomy and those who did not undergo lymphadenectomy. However, women who underwent lymphadenectomy had a significantly higher risk of surgery-related systemic morbidity and lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation than those who did not undergo lymphadenectomy (RR 3.72, 95% CI 1.04 to 13.27; RR 8.39, 95% CI 4.06 to 17.33 for risk of surgery-related systemic morbidity and lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation, respectively) (1922 participants, two studies; high-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found no evidence that lymphadenectomy decreases risk of death or disease recurrence compared with no lymphadenectomy in women with presumed stage I disease. Evidence on serious adverse events suggests that women who undergo lymphadenectomy are more likely to experience surgery-related systemic morbidity or lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation. Currently, no RCT evidence shows the impact of lymphadenectomy in women with higher-stage disease and in those at high risk of disease recurrence.

Lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

Endometrial carcinoma is the most common gynaecological cancer in western Europe and North America. Lymph node metastases can be found in approximately 10% of women who clinically have cancer confined to the womb prior to surgery and removal of all pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes (lymphadenectomy) is widely advocated. Pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy is part of the FIGO staging system for endometrial cancer. This recommendation is based on non-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) data that suggested improvement in survival following pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. However, treatment of pelvic lymph nodes may not confer a direct therapeutic benefit, other than allocating women to poorer prognosis groups. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs of routine adjuvant radiotherapy to treat possible lymph node metastases in women with early-stage endometrial cancer, did not find a survival advantage. Surgical removal of pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes has serious potential short and long-term sequelae and most women will not have positive lymph nodes. It is therefore important to establish the clinical value of a treatment with known morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 2, 2009. Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Review Group Trials Register, MEDLINE (1966 to June 2009), Embase (1966 to June 2009). We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and quasi-RCTs that compared lymphadenectomy with no lymphadenectomy, in adult women diagnosed with endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. Hazard ratios (HRs) for overall and progression-free survival and risk ratios (RRs) comparing adverse events in women who received lymphadenectomy or no lymphadenectomy were pooled in random effects meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Two RCTs met the inclusion criteria; they randomised 1945 women, and reported HRs for survival, adjusted for prognostic factors, based on 1851 women.Meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in overall and recurrence-free survival between women who received lymphadenectomy and those who received no lymphadenectomy (pooled HR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.43 and HR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.96 to 1.58 for overall and recurrence-free survival respectively).We found no statistically significant difference in risk of direct surgical morbidity between women who received lymphadenectomy and those who received no lymphadenectomy. However, women who received lymphadenectomy had a significantly higher risk of surgically related systemic morbidity and lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation than those who had no lymphadenectomy (RR = 3.72, 95% CI: 1.04 to 13.27 and RR = 8.39, 95% CI: 4.06, 17.33 for risk of surgically related systemic morbidity and lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation respectively).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that lymphadenectomy decreases the risk of death or disease recurrence compared with no lymphadenectomy in women with presumed stage I disease. The evidence on serious adverse events suggests that women who receive lymphadenectomy are more likely to experience surgically related systemic morbidity or lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation.

Prediction of cervical involvement in endometrial cancer by hysteroscopy

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the ability of hysteroscopy to preoperatively predict cervical involvement in endometrial cancer.

METHODS

The records of 110 surgically staged consecutive endometrial cancer patients treated at our institution from 1997 to 2003 were retrospectively analyzed. Data on demographics, preoperative staging procedures, surgical pathology reports, and adjuvant treatments were retrieved.

RESULTS

Fourteen (12.7%) patients had cervical involvement (stage II) according to the surgical pathology report, of whom nine (8.1%) had stage IIA and five (4.6%) had stage IIB. Clinical evaluation by speculoscopy and palpation had failed to reveal any indication of cervical involvement. Preoperative diagnostic hysteroscopy procedures were included. None of the hysteroscopy procedures revealed any suspicious lesion in the cervical canal.

CONCLUSION

Hysteroscopy and clinical examination fail to adequately predict cervical involvement in endometrial carcinoma. Fractional D&C appears to be the best method until a more effective alternative becomes available.

Clinicopathological study of the pattern and significance of cervical involvement in cases of endometrial adenocarcinoma

The pattern of cervical involvement in 107 endometrial adenocarcinomas was assessed. The cervix was involved in 29%, higher than noted in previous studies. In 40.6%, the lesion was confined to surface endocervical epithelium only; the remainder had cervical stromal involvement. In the majority only small areas within the circumference of the cervix were affected, indicating a need for adequate tissue sampling. In some cases, malignant epithelium was found as a "migrant" within the endocervical canal, entrapped within cervical mucus or applied to surface epithelium, supporting the concept that endometrial cancer spreads by surface contiguity or implantation rather than by deep tissue planes or via lymphatic channels. Our findings reinforce the view that high-grade lesions and histological subtypes such as uterine serous papillary carcinoma are associated with a later presentation, higher stage and poorer prognosis. We have identified atypical changes in endocervical epithelium that may be misinterpreted as cervical involvement, particularly in the form of atypical reserve cell hyperplasia with a micropapillary pattern that may reflect a reaction to the presence of tumor. It is our assertion that the presence of tumor "migrants", and not endocervical surface atypia, is an indicator of increased probability of cervical involvement by endometrial adenocarcinoma (P = 0.015).

Survival of women with surgical stage II endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to report survival and determine prognostic factors and results of therapy in women with surgical stage II endometrial cancer.

METHODS

Forty-eight consecutive women with surgical stage II endometrial cancer treated at the University of Vermont between March 1984 and March 1998 were reviewed. Patients' characteristics, surgical procedure, postoperative treatment and its complications, and tumor recurrence and its treatment were recorded. In addition, a formal review of their pathological material for confirmation of the diagnosis was performed.

RESULTS

The median duration of follow-up was 6.2 years. Three patients (6.3%) had tumor recurrence and two (4.2%) died of their disease. The estimated 5-year overall survival and disease-free survivals were 92.1% (SE = 5.5%, 95% confidence interval: 81.3, 100%) and 89.9% (SE = 5.8%, 95% confidence interval: 78.5%, 100%), respectively. None of the patients treated by total abdominal hysterectomy followed by both whole pelvic and vaginal cuff radiation therapy (the main line of treatment for patients in whom cervical involvement was diagnosed following hysterectomy, n = 20) or by radical hysterectomy (the main line of treatment for patients in whom cervical involvement was known before hysterectomy, n = 11) had tumor recurrence. Three of 17 (17.6%) patients treated with total abdominal hysterectomy followed by either whole pelvic (n = 13) or vaginal cuff (n = 4) radiation therapy had tumor recurrence. The difference between those two groups was statistically significant (0/31 versus 3/17, P = 0.02). There was no difference in survival among women with stage IIA and IIB or women who underwent radical abdominal hysterectomy and those who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy with postoperative pelvic and vaginal cuff radiation. Morbidity secondary to therapy was mild. Age, depth of myometrial invasion, tumor histology, and grade were not significantly related to recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival of women with surgical stage II endometrial cancer is excellent especially among those treated with total abdominal hysterectomy followed by both pelvic and vaginal cuff radiotherapy or by radical abdominal hysterectomy.

Stage II endometrial carcinoma: prognostic factors and the results of treatment

Results of treatment and potential prognostic factors in 54 patients with clinical stage II endometrial carcinoma were analyzed. During the period analyzed, three different treatment techniques were used. The highest cure rate (70.6%) was observed in patients treated with simple hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy followed by external pelvic irradiation and vaginal irradiation. Radiation therapy alone cured 50%. High tumor grade, deep myometrial invasion (greater than 50%), and invasion of the cervical stroma reduced the cure rates, but the only factor significantly reducing cure rate was patient age. Patients 59 years of age or older fared significantly more poorly than younger patients. Significant complications was observed in 9.3% of patients. Prospective studies of standardized treatment techniques in patients with stage II endometrial carcinoma are necessary to achieve better results and acquire more information.

Results of treatment in locally advanced carcinoma of the endometrium

The impact of treatment on survival was analyzed in 106 patients with carcinoma of the endometrium stage II (n = 61) and stage III (n = 45). There was no significant difference in survival in patients with stage II who were treated with radiation therapy alone or with combination of surgery and radiation therapy. Their five-year actuarial survival was 74.5% and 71.3% respectively (p = greater than 0.05). However, combined treatment was associated with significantly superior survival in patients with stage III disease where the survival was 57.3% versus 17.5% in patients who received irradiation alone (p = 0.01). Diagnosis of stage III disease based upon clinical (CS III) or pathological (PS III) findings was responsible for this difference in survival. Patients with CS III whose tumor could not be resected because of its extent carried poorer prognosis. Patients with stage II had excellent tumor control in pelvis as compared to patients with stage III. Treatment-related complications were minimal. Overall survival of patients with stage III was poor (33.8%) due to a high rate of pelvic and/or extrapelvic recurrences.

Treatment of stage II endometrial carcinoma

The optimal management of stage II carcinoma of the endometrium remains to be established. We reviewed our experience in treating 42 patients with stage II endometrial cancer by surgery, radiation, or combined radiation and surgery at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. The overall 5-year survival was 47.6%. The 5-year survivals of patients treated by surgery only, radiation only, or combination radiation and surgery were 68.5, 36.5, and 46.1%, respectively, which were not significantly different. Histologic grade was found a significant prognostic factor but type of cervical involvement was not. Major complication rates were similar in each treatment group. We conclude that the majority of patients with stage II endometrial carcinoma are best treated by combination radiation and surgery, but in a select subset of patients, radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy constitute a reasonable treatment option.

Radiation therapy in stage II carcinoma of the endometrium

A retrospective analysis of 61 patients with Stage II carcinoma of the endometrium was carried out. Our results suggest that when given carefully and adequately, radiation therapy alone is as effective as a combination of surgery and irradiation and is well tolerated. Five-year actuarial survival was 74.5% in patients treated with radiation therapy alone (16 patients) as compared to those patients who received either preoperative radiation (35 patients) or postoperation radiation (ten patients) where the survival was 70.8% and 78.3%, respectively (P greater than or equal to 0.05). Tumor was controlled in the pelvis in 93.4% of patients. Complications of treatment were seen in 8.2%. With the exception of one patient with bowel obstruction requiring surgery, the rest of the complications were minor. From these results, it appears that a planned radiotherapy is a good alternative to combination of surgery and irradiation.

Endometrial carcinoma: is there a place for radical surgery?

Endometrial carcinoma may require a combination of therapeutic modalities to effect a cure. The generalist obstetrician and gynaecologist wishing to treat endometrial carcinoma must be fully conversant with current developments in gynaecological cancer therapy. Referral of patients to centres with special expertise in gynaecological oncology is desirable for accurate clinical evaluation and the selection of optimal treatment. There is a limited place for radical surgery in the treatment of endometrial carcinoma. Evaluation of nodal status is essential to surgical staging and allows for individualization of postoperative therapy. Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy is reasonable treatment for Stage II disease if the patient is fit and irradiation is contraindicated. There has been little improvement in survival despite the use of radical surgery and improved delivery of radiation. New strategies are needed to combat this disease. We can now identify women with significant risk of metastases and treatment failure. These women need effective adjuvant therapy to achieve improved cure of their cancer. Hormonal manipulations are under investigation and immunotherapy may eventually have a therapeutic role, but is currently experimental. Chemotherapy has a proven effect in some disseminated malignancies. It would seem that we are ready for the development and evaluation of perioperative chemotherapeutic regimens.

Adenocarcinoma corpus et colli: analysis of diagnostic variables

Between January 1973 and December 1983, 469 patients with carcinoma of the endometrium were seen at this institution. Eighty-one patients were identified with adenocarcinoma involving both the uterine body and the cervix. Patients were divided into three groups for evaluation. Group A (n = 58) had a positive cervical biopsy or endocervical curettage, but a normal-appearing cervix at clinical examination. Group B (n = 18) had gross tumor involving the cervix which was confirmed by biopsy. Group C (n = 5) had unsuspected cervical involvement revealed at hysterectomy. Fourteen Group A patients received preoperative radiation therapy. Thirty of the 44 Group A patients (68.2%) who did not receive preoperative radiation, had no involvement of the cervix by tumor in the hysterectomy specimen. Seventy-six patients were eligible for follow-up of at least 18 months. There were 24 recurrences among these 76 patients. Recurrence was more common with advancing grade and with increasing myometrial invasion. Pelvic failures occurred with comparable frequency in both Groups A and B. Only 4 of 11 patients who were found to have extrauterine disease at surgery are still alive. In this study, we found that endocervical curettage has a significant false-positive rate, both histologic grade and volume of cervical involvement should be considered in treatment planning, primary operation should be considered in the management of selected patients with Stage II endometrial carcinoma, and extrauterine disease is a grave prognostic factor.

Stage II carcinoma of the endometrium: results of therapy and prognostic factors

A retrospective analysis is reported of 116 patients with Stage II carcinoma of the endometrium treated definitively with combined radiation and total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (TAH-BSO) or irradiation alone from January 1960 through December 1981. At 5 and 10 years, the overall survival for all patients was 71 and 52% and the disease-free survival was 73 and 69%, respectively. Of 90 patients in the combined therapy group, most received a preoperative intracavitary insertion (3500 mgh to the uterus and 2000 mgh to the upper vagina) and preoperative external beam pelvic irradiation (2000 cGy whole pelvis, additional 3000 cGy to parametria, with midline shield) followed in 4 to 6 weeks by a TAH-BSO. The 5 and 10 year disease-free survival for this group was 78 and 75%, respectively. The incidence of major complications was 7% for the combined therapy group. Twenty-six patients were treated with irradiation alone; most of them received two intracavitary insertions (5000 mgh to the uterus and 3000 mgh to the upper vagina) and external beam pelvic irradiation (2000 cGy whole pelvis, additional 3000 cGy to parametria). The 5 and 10 year disease-free survival was 53 and 45%, respectively. The incidence of major complications was 19%. Factors found to influence the prognosis were histologic grade of tumor, clinical and histologic degree of tumor involvement of the ectocervix, presence of residual tumor in the hysterectomy specimen and the depth of myometrial invasion.

Residual carcinoma in the surgical specimen of patients with endometrial adenocarcinoma undergoing preoperative radiation therapy. A study of 80 patients and a literature review

Controversy continues to surround the significance of residual endometrial adenocarcinoma in the uterus following radiation therapy. Eighty patients with FIGO stage IA, IB, and II endometrial adenocarcinoma treated by preoperative radiotherapy were studied. No correlation was noted between the histologic grade of the lesion and the stage of disease. The frequency and the site of residual carcinoma were not related to the stage of disease but less-differentiated tumors persisted more frequently than grade I lesions. The modality of preoperative radiotherapy did not affect the frequency of residual tumor. Residual carcinoma within the uterus had no effect on the site or frequency of recurrence nor on patient survival.