Literature DB >> 11531298

Nodal distribution and its significance in FIGO stage IIIc endometrial cancer.

D S McMeekin1, D Lashbrook, M Gold, D R Scribner, S Kamelle, T D Tillmanns, R Mannel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the distribution of nodal disease in FIGO Stage IIIc endometrial cancer (EC) and to evaluate whether nodal distribution is related to recurrence and survival.
METHODS: Charts from EC patients with FIGO Stage IIIc disease from 1989 to 1998 were abstracted for clinicopathologic data, pelvic (PLN) and para-aortic (PALN) nodal involvement, number of positive/removed nodes, and extranodal disease spread. Patterns of nodal distribution were evaluated for site of first recurrence and survival. Associations between variables were tested by chi(2) and Wilcoxon rank sums. Survival analyses were performed by the Kaplan-Meier method.
RESULTS: Of 607 EC patients evaluated, 47 were identified with FIGO Stage IIIc disease. All 47 patients underwent hysterectomy and PLN sampling, and 42/47 had PALN sampling. The median number of PLN removed was 16 (range 2-35), and the median number of PALN was 7 (0-18). Stage IIIc disease was defined by positive PLN alone in 43%, positive PLN and PALN in 40%, and positive PALN alone in 17%. Positive peritoneal cytology and/or adnexal metastasis were present in 12 patients. Only 1/12 of these patients had isolated positive PLN whereas 11/12 had positive PALN (P = 0.007). An increasing number of positive PLN was associated with PALN metastasis (P = 0.0001), and of the 10 patients with bilateral PLN involvement, 9/10 also had positive PALN (P = 0.001). Sites of first recurrence were similar regardless of whether PALN were positive. At a median follow-up of 37 months, the 3-year survival estimate was 70% for patients with positive PALN versus 87% for those with isolated PLN disease (P = 0.22). For all patients neither the total number of positive PLN nor the total number of PLN or PALN removed was associated with survival.
CONCLUSIONS: PALN involvement is common in patients with FIGO Stage IIIc endometrial cancer, suggesting that PLN sampling alone may result in underdiagnosis of disease. Patients with positive PALN had more extensive disease, but survival and patterns of failure were not significantly different from those with disease confined to PLN, suggesting that lymph node dissection may have a therapeutic role. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11531298     DOI: 10.1006/gyno.2001.6278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  14 in total

1.  Management of lymph nodes in the treatment of gynecologic cancers.

Authors:  Toshiharu Kamura
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-06-27       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Adjuvant Chemotherapy plus Radiation for Locally Advanced Endometrial Cancer.

Authors:  Daniela Matei; Virginia Filiaci; Marcus E Randall; David Mutch; Margaret M Steinhoff; Paul A DiSilvestro; Katherine M Moxley; Yong M Kim; Matthew A Powell; David M O'Malley; Nick M Spirtos; William Small; Krishnansu S Tewari; William E Richards; John Nakayama; Ursula A Matulonis; Helen Q Huang; David S Miller
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-06-13       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 3.  The role of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Mariam M AlHilli; Andrea Mariani
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Risk factors for paraaortic lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Mustafa Erkan Sari; İbrahim Yalcin; Hanifi Sahin; Mehmet Mutlu Meydanli; Tayfun Gungor
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  FDG PET/CT diagnostic criteria may need adjustment based on MRI to estimate the presurgical risk of extrapelvic infiltration in patients with uterine endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Satoko Sudo; Naoya Hattori; Osamu Manabe; Fumi Kato; Rie Mimura; Keiichi Magota; Hiroyuki Sugimori; Kenji Hirata; Noriaki Sakuragi; Nagara Tamaki
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-12-13       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Diffusion-weighted imaging in the assessment of tumour grade in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  N Bharwani; M E Miquel; A Sahdev; P Narayanan; G Malietzis; R H Reznek; A G Rockall
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-09-06       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Efficacy of contemporary chemotherapy in stage IIIC endometrial cancer: a histologic dichotomy.

Authors:  Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez; Andrea Mariani; Sean C Dowdy; Amy L Weaver; Michaela E McGree; Janice R Martin; Gary L Keeney; Aminah Jatoi; Bobbie S Gostout; Karl C Podratz
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  A cohort study evaluating paraaortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Haiyan Zhang; Zhi Zuo; Ye Wang; Li Wang; Zhiling Zhu
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 2.967

9.  The effect of cell type on surgico-pathologic risk factors in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Ahmet Taner Turan; Betül Dündar; Burcu Gündoğdu; Abdullah Boztosun; Nejat Ozgül; Nurettin Boran; Gökhan Tulunay; Ahmet Ozfuttu; Mehmet Faruk Köse
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2011-03-01

10.  Imaging of endometrial and cervical cancer.

Authors:  Shilpa Patel; Sidath H Liyanage; Anju Sahdev; Andrea G Rockall; Rodney H Reznek
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2010-09-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.