Literature DB >> 25380693

Is mucinous adenocarcinoma of the endometrium a risk factor for lymph node involvement? A multicenter case-control study.

Kemal Gungorduk1, Aykut Ozdemir, Ibrahim Egemen Ertas, Ilker Selcuk, Ulas Solmaz, Emre Ozgu, Emre Mat, Mehmet Gokcu, Tuba Karadeniz, Serap Akbay, Muzaffer Sanci, Mehmet Mutlu Meydanli, Duygu Ayaz, Tayfun Gungor.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this multicenter case-control study was to compare the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with mucinous adenocarcinoma of the endometrium (MAE) and endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC).
METHODS: A retrospective review of two cancer registry databases in Turkey was conducted to identify patients diagnosed with MAE between January 1996 and December 2012. Each patient was matched with a control EEC patient by age and tumor grade. Cases and controls were compared in terms of known risk factors for lymph node metastasis, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS: The analysis included 112 patients with MAE and 112 with EEC. No significant difference in baseline characteristics was evident between the two groups. Lymphovascular space invasion, deep myometrial invasion, cervical involvement, and tumor diameter did not differ significantly between the mucinous and endometrioid cases. Multivariate analysis confirmed that only mucinous histology (OR 2.2, 95 % CI 1.1-4.5; P = 0.02) was an independent predictor of lymph node involvement. Although the median DFS and OS tended to be better in the endometrioid group, the differences were not statistically significant. Routine appendectomy was performed in 52 (46.2 %) patients with MAE. No mucinous tumor of the appendix was identified.
CONCLUSION: Routine appendectomy is not necessary when the appendix is grossly normal at the time of surgery for MAE. Although the DFS and OS of EEC and MAE patients were similar, the risk of nodal metastasis in MAE patients was greater than that in ECC patients, and we thus suggest to perform retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy (both pelvic and para-aortic) for patients with MAE during the initial operation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25380693     DOI: 10.1007/s10147-014-0767-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 1341-9625            Impact factor:   3.402


  18 in total

1.  Combined use of magnetic resonance imaging, CA 125 assay, histologic type, and histologic grade in the prediction of lymph node metastasis in endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  Yukiharu Todo; Noriaki Sakuragi; Ryutaro Nishida; Takashi Yamada; Yasuhiko Ebina; Ritsu Yamamoto; Seiichiro Fujimoto
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Role of omentectomy and appendectomy in surgical staging of endometrioid endometrial cancer.

Authors:  B Ozdal; B S Unlu; H R Yalcin; O L Tapisiz; H Energin; M Besli; T Gungor
Journal:  Eur J Gynaecol Oncol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 0.196

Review 3.  Endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Frederic Amant; Philippe Moerman; Patrick Neven; Dirk Timmerman; Erik Van Limbergen; Ignace Vergote
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Aug 6-12       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Appendiceal metastasis 10 years following 'curative' resection for low-grade primary endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  Alfred Bentsi Addison; Katy Miller; Dalia Hammouch; Naseem Waraich; Phillip Kaye; Rakesh Kapur; William Tennant
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2012-03-20

5.  Mucinous Adenocarcinoma of the Endometrium Compared With Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer: A SEER Analysis.

Authors:  Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Roberto J Vargas; Joel Clemmer; Rachel M Clark; Leslie S Bradford; Whitfield B Growdon; Annekathryn Goodman; David M Boruta; John O Schorge; Marcela G del Carmen
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.339

6.  Mucinous histology is a risk factor for nodal metastases in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Fernanda Musa; Marilyn Huang; Brandi Adams; Edyta Pirog; Kevin Holcomb
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2012-03-09       Impact factor: 5.482

7.  Concurrent endometrial carcinoma in women with a biopsy diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

Authors:  Cornelia L Trimble; James Kauderer; Richard Zaino; Steven Silverberg; Peter C Lim; James J Burke; David Alberts; John Curtin
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-02-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia. A long-term study of "untreated" hyperplasia in 170 patients.

Authors:  R J Kurman; P F Kaminski; H J Norris
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1985-07-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 9.  Role of pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer: current evidence.

Authors:  Giorgio Bogani; Sean C Dowdy; William A Cliby; Fabio Ghezzi; Diego Rossetti; Andrea Mariani
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 1.730

10.  Risk-scoring system for the individualized prediction of lymphatic dissemination in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer.

Authors:  M M AlHilli; K C Podratz; S C Dowdy; J N Bakkum-Gamez; A L Weaver; M E McGree; G L Keeney; W A Cliby; A Mariani
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2013-07-09       Impact factor: 5.482

View more
  2 in total

1.  Frequent promoter methylation of HOXD10 in endometrial carcinoma and its pathological significance.

Authors:  Fan Yang; Dongchen Liu; Yupeng Deng; Jun Wang; Shuyu Mei; Shuang Ge; Hailing Li; Cuijuan Zhang; Tingguo Zhang
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2020-03-19       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 2.  [Grading of gynecological tumors : Current aspects].

Authors:  L-C Horn; D Mayr; C E Brambs; J Einenkel; I Sändig; K Schierle
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 1.011

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.