H Tu1, P Sun2, H F Gu1, X K Zhang2, H Huang1, T Wan1, J H Liu3. 1. State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou 510060, People's Republic of China; Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou 510060, People's Republic of China. 2. State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou 510060, People's Republic of China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou 510060, People's Republic of China. 3. State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou 510060, People's Republic of China; Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou 510060, People's Republic of China. Electronic address: liujih@mail.sysu.edu.cn.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical significance and prognostic value of femoral lymph node metastasis (FLNM) in patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage III vulvar carcinoma. METHODS: The medical records of patients with vulvar carcinoma who underwent inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy between 1990 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Of 66 patients with stage III vulvar carcinoma, 42 had superficial lymph node metastasis (SLNM) only and 24 had FLNM. Significantly higher rates of extracapsular invasion (P = 0.008), multiple nodal metastasis (P = 0.042), and advanced FIGO substage (P = 0.026) as well as a larger tumor diameter (≥4 cm, P = 0.023) and greater depth of invasion (≥5 mm, P = 0.020) were observed among patients with FLNM compared to those with SLNM only. After a median follow-up of 46 months (range, 6-172 months), 35 patients experienced relapse and 30 died from disease. The 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates were 70.1% and 30.8% for patients with SLNM only and FLNM, respectively (P = 0.001). In multivariate analysis, only FLNM was found to be an independent risk factor for reduced recurrence-free survival (RFS) and CSS among patients with stage III vulvar cancer (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.277, P = 0.037 for RFS; HR = 2.360, P = 0.042 for CSS). When the FLNM cases were considered together as stage IIIC, significant differences emerged in the RFS (P = 0.002) and CSS (P = 0.004) among the re-divided FIGO substages. CONCLUSIONS: FLNM represented an unfavorable status of node metastasis with a worse prognosis compared to that of SLNM alone, and this should be considered in a future FIGO staging system for vulvar cancer.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical significance and prognostic value of femoral lymph node metastasis (FLNM) in patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage III vulvar carcinoma. METHODS: The medical records of patients with vulvar carcinoma who underwent inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy between 1990 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Of 66 patients with stage III vulvar carcinoma, 42 had superficial lymph node metastasis (SLNM) only and 24 had FLNM. Significantly higher rates of extracapsular invasion (P = 0.008), multiple nodal metastasis (P = 0.042), and advanced FIGO substage (P = 0.026) as well as a larger tumor diameter (≥4 cm, P = 0.023) and greater depth of invasion (≥5 mm, P = 0.020) were observed among patients with FLNM compared to those with SLNM only. After a median follow-up of 46 months (range, 6-172 months), 35 patients experienced relapse and 30 died from disease. The 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates were 70.1% and 30.8% for patients with SLNM only and FLNM, respectively (P = 0.001). In multivariate analysis, only FLNM was found to be an independent risk factor for reduced recurrence-free survival (RFS) and CSS among patients with stage III vulvar cancer (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.277, P = 0.037 for RFS; HR = 2.360, P = 0.042 for CSS). When the FLNM cases were considered together as stage IIIC, significant differences emerged in the RFS (P = 0.002) and CSS (P = 0.004) among the re-divided FIGO substages. CONCLUSIONS:FLNM represented an unfavorable status of node metastasis with a worse prognosis compared to that of SLNM alone, and this should be considered in a future FIGO staging system for vulvar cancer.