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

The impact of lymphadenectomy on cancerspecific survival in patients with low-grade endometrioid carcinoma of stage T1a

For patients with low-grade endometrioid carcinoma of stage T1a, the role of lymphadenectomy in staging surgery remains controversial. This study aims to evaluate the impact of lymphadenectomy on cancer-specific survival (CSS) in this patient population using a large, population-based dataset. We conducted a retrospective analysis using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, identifying 11,014 patients with stage T1a, low-grade endometrioid carcinoma from 2004 to 2015. Patients were divided into lymphadenectomy and non-lymphadenectomy groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance baseline characteristics. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank tests, and multivariate Cox regression were used to assess CSS and identify independent prognostic factors. Before PSM, the non-lymphadenectomy group had higher CSS compared to the lymphadenectomy group (HR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.16-2.10, p = .003). After 1:1 PSM, CSS was similar between the two groups (HR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.78-1.53, p = .605). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in CSS except for the subgroup with tumor size > 2 cm, where non-lymphadenectomy was associated with better CSS (HR = 0.50, p = .035). Multivariate Cox regression analysis identified age, marital status, histological grade, and chemotherapy as independent prognostic factors for CSS, while lymphadenectomy was not (p = .980).. Our findings suggest that lymphadenectomy does not improve CSS in patients with low-grade endometrioid carcinoma of stage T1a.

Survival outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy alone versus back-up systematic lymph node dissection in high-risk endometrial Cancer: A Turkish Gynecologic Oncology group study (TRSGO-SLN-007)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Investigate whether there is an oncological benefit of performing back up systematic lymphadenectomy in addition to bilateral sentinel node biopsy.

METHODS

This multicentre retrospective study included patients with high-risk endometrial cancer treated at four gynaecological oncology clinics in Turkey between 2014 and 2023. Patients were stratified according to both conventional and ESGO risk criteria, and within each category were divided into two groups respectively "Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Group (SLN-only)" and "Back-up Lymphadenectomy Group (Back-up LND)". Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared using univariate and multivariable Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

56 patients in the SLN-only group and 158 patients in the Back-up LND group comprised of the Conventional High-Risk Group (CONV-HR) in the analysis. There was no significant difference statistically in terms of DFS (Log-Rank P = 0.29) and OS (Log-Rank P = 0.99). The European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology (ESGO) High-Risk Group (ESGO-HR) consisted of 44 patients in the SLN-only group and 133 patients in the Back-up LND group were included. The median follow-up periods were 27 months (IQR = 15-38) and 28 (IQR = 16-38) months, respectively. Recurrence rate was 14.1 % and mortality rate was 9.6 %. There was no significant difference statistically in terms of DFS (Log-Rank P = 0.342) and OS (Log Rank P = 0.488).

CONCLUSION

Sentinel lymph node biopsy is a safe and effective method for lymph node assessment in high-risk and clinical early-stage endometrial cancer. The addition of systematic lymphadenectomy did not provide any oncological benefit in terms of survival outcomes.

Quality of life and survival in patients with uterine carcinosarcoma: A tertiary center observational study

Objective

This study aimed to assess the QoL in patients with uterine carcinosarcoma (UCS) and identify factors influencing survival.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted of patients with UCS who were treated between 2016 and 2022 in a Dutch academic hospital. QoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-EN24 questionnaires at baseline, end of treatment, and at one, two, and five years after treatment. Outcomes were described as mean scores in functioning and symptom domains. The mean scores of the QLQ-C30 were compared to those of a matched group from the general Dutch population. Clinical data were collected. Factors influencing survival were assessed via Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

The study included 64 patients, 56 of them participated in the QoL questionnaires. The median progression-free survival was 13 months, and overall survival was 20 months. QoL was significantly lower in all functional domains at one year after treatment compared to members of the general population. The most affected functioning domains were physical, role, cognitive, and social functioning and symptoms like fatigue, pain, and lymphedema. Long-term QoL remained compromised, with global health and insomnia notably impaired even five years after treatment. Significant prognostic factors for better overall survival included lower FIGO stage, surgery, and chemotherapy.

Conclusions

Patients with UCS experience significant deterioration in QoL. Despite extensive treatment, QoL remains poor, emphasizing the need for integrating QoL considerations into treatment decisions to balance the benefits of treatment with potential QoL impairments.

Preserving circumflex iliac lymph nodes to reduce the incidence of lower limb lymphedema following lymphadenectomy in cervical and endometrial cancers: A prospective randomized controlled trial

Lower limb lymphedema (LLL) is a common postoperative complication following lymphadenectomy in cervical and endometrial cancers. Removal of the circumflex iliac nodes distal to the external iliac node (CINDEIN) is associated with LLL. Here, we sought to evaluate whether preserving the CINDEIN is helpful in reducing the incidence of LLL in women with cervical and endometrial cancers and to evaluate the safety of preserving CINDEIN. In this prospective randomized controlled trial, patients with clinical stage I A2 to II A cervical cancer and stage I to III endometrial carcinoma undergoing surgery were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo pelvic lymphadenectomy with CINDEIN removal or preservation. The primary endpoint was the incidence of LLL at 24 months post-surgery. Eligible patients underwent sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping with carbon nanoparticles (CNP). The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number ChiCTR2300071911. Between Jun 1, 2017, and Dec 31, 2018, 328 participants were randomly assigned to the two groups. Thirteen patients were excluded from the lymphedema analysis. A total of 158 patients in the CINDEIN preservation group and 157 in the CINDEIN removal group completed the follow-up examination. At baseline, no significant differences were observed between the two groups. The 3-year overall survival rate was 96.9% in the preservation group and 95.7% in the resection group. For cervical cancer and endometrial carcinoma, the incidence of LLL were significantly lower in the preservation group than in the removal group both at 24 months. No differences in the occurrence time of LLL were observed between the two groups. The LLL stages also showed no significant difference between the two groups. In the removal group, no CINDEIN metastases were identified in any patient. A total of 125 evaluable patients received the injection of CNP. None of the patients had CINDEIN detected as SLNs. CINDEIN removal is an important risk factor for LLL following lymphadenectomy in cervical and endometrial cancers. The metastasis rate of CINDEIN in cervical cancer and early endometrial cancer is relatively low, and preserving CINDEIN might be safe and helpful in reducing the occurrence of LLL.

Implementation of sentinel node biopsy in high-risk endometrial cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

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.

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.