| Literature DB >> 27230108 |
Anna Fagotti1, Luigi Pedone Anchora2, Carmine Conte2, Vito Chiantera3, Enrico Vizza4, Lucia Tortorella2, Daniela Surico5, Pierandrea De Iaco6, Giacomo Corrado4, Francesco Fanfani2, Valerio Gallotta2, Giovanni Scambia2.
Abstract
Nowadays cervical cancer is frequently diagnosed at early stage. For these patients lymph node metastasis (LNM) is considered the most important prognostic factor. During the last decade many efforts have been made to reduce rate of complications associated with lymphadenectomy (LND). A great interest has arisen in sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy as a technique able to decrease number of LND performed and, at the same time, to assess lymph nodal status. High diagnostic performances have been reached thanks to SLN surgical algorithm. However, despite the efforts, about 25% of these patients undergo at least unilateral LND to meet NCCN recommendations. Data of women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IA1-IB1/IIA1 cervical carcinoma were retrospectively collected by six Italian institutions. All patients underwent complete preoperative staging workup and were primarily treated by radical hysterectomy and pelvic bilateral LND. A total of 368 patients with early-stage cervical cancer were identified. Among them 333 (90.5%) showed no suspicious enlarged nodes at the preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In this subset, tumor diameter ≥20 mm was the only independent predictor of LN status (P = 0.003). None of the 106 patients with negative MRI nodal assessment, with squamous and adenosquamous histotype and a tumor diameter less than 2 cm had LNM. Based on these results we propose a new modified SLN surgical algorithm that could safely reduce LND performed in patients with very low-risk early-stage cervical cancer.Entities:
Keywords: Cervical cancer; early stage; lymphadenectomy; sentinel lymph node
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27230108 PMCID: PMC4971900 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.722
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Med ISSN: 2045-7634 Impact factor: 4.452
Demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics of all patients
| Characteristics | Patients, |
|---|---|
| All | 333 |
| Median age (years) (range) | 46 (25–76) |
| Median BMI (kg/m2) (range) | 24 (17–51) |
| Median tumor diameter (mm) (range) | 17 (1–40) |
| FIGO stage | |
| IA 1/2 | 41 (12.3) |
| IB 1 | 289 (86.8) |
| IIA 1 | 3 (0.9) |
| Histology | |
| Squamous carcinoma | 229 (68.8) |
| Adenocarcinoma | 81 (24.3) |
| Adenosquamous | 15 (4.5) |
| Clear cell | 4 (1.2) |
| Other | 4 (1.2) |
| Grading | |
| 1 | 29 (8.8) |
| 2 | 152 (45.6) |
| 3 | 152 (45.6) |
| Median no. pelvic LNs removed (range) | 28 (14–80) |
| No. of cases with positive pelvic LNs | 32 (9.6) |
| No. of cases submitted to aortic LND | 37 (11.1) |
| Median no. aortic LNs removed (range) | 14 (2–37) |
| No. of cases with positive aortic LNs | 4 (10.8) |
BMI, body mass index; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; LNs, lymph nodes; LND, lymphadenectomy.
Clinicopathologic factors related to LNM.a
| Analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor | LNM | Univariate | Multivariate | |
| No | Yes |
|
| |
| Age | ||||
| <46 | 141 | 16 | ||
| ≥46 | 160 | 16 | 0.438 | – |
| FIGO stage | ||||
| IA 1/2 | 41 | 0 | ||
| IB 1 | 258 | 31 | ||
| IIA 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 0.153 |
| Histology | ||||
| Squamous carcinoma | 209 | 20 | ||
| Adenocarcinoma | 74 | 7 | ||
| Adenosquamous | 11 | 4 | ||
| Clear cell | 3 | 1 | ||
| Other | 4 | 0 | 0.145 | – |
| Grading | ||||
| 1 | 29 | 0 | ||
| 2 | 140 | 12 | ||
| 3 | 132 | 20 | 0.054 | – |
| Tumor diameter (mm) | ||||
| <20 | 176 | 1 | ||
| ≥20 | 125 | 31 |
|
|
LNM, lymph node metastasis; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Only variables with a P < 0.05 at univariate analysis were included in multivariate analysis. Variables with a P < 0.05 were highlighted in bold
Chi‐squared test or Fisher exact test.
Logistic regression analysis.
Figure 1Progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in very low‐risk group (VLRG) and no‐VLRG patient population.
Figure 2Distribution of lymphnodal assessment procedures in 100 patients with ECC and negative lymph nodal assessment at preoperative imaging. VLRG selection after SLN (A); VLRG selection before SLN (B). ECC, early cervical cancer; VLRG, very low‐risk group; SLN, sentinel lymph node.