| Literature DB >> 29416813 |
Hao Lu1, Rong Guo2, Haotian Yang3,4, Haolu Wang3, Xiaowen Liang3, Zhiqian Hu1, Xinxing Li1.
Abstract
Negative lymph node (NLN) count has been recognized as a prognostic indicator in various cancers. However, the relationship between NLN count and the prognosis of cervical cancer is still unknown. In this study, 10, 500 cervical cancer patients after radical surgery were selected from Epidemiology and End Results Program (SEER) data. Clinicopathological characteristics were collected for analysis, including year of diagnosis, age, race, grade, primary site, FIGO stage and cause specific survival (CSS). Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess risk factors for survival of patients. X-tile plots identified 6 as the optimal cutoff value of NLN count to divide patients into high and low risk subsets in terms of CSS (χ2 = 183.95, P < 0.001). The rate of 5-year CCS of cervical cancer patients was improved with an increase in NLN count from 0 to 23 (all P < 0.001). NLN count was validated as an independently prognostic factor by the multivariate Cox analysis (HR: 1.571, 95% CI: 1.370~1.801, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that NLN count was a prognosis factor in FIGO stage I (χ2=35.023, P < 0.001), stage II (χ2 = 12.910, P < 0.001), stage III + IV (χ2 = 9.732, P = 0.002) and unknown stage (χ2 = 16.654, P < 0.001). Conclusively, this study demonstrated the NLN count was an independent prognostic factor for cervical cancer patients.Entities:
Keywords: SEER; cervical cancer; negative lymph node; radical surgery
Year: 2017 PMID: 29416813 PMCID: PMC5788681 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.23596
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Baseline demographic and tumor characteristics of patients with cervical cancer in SEER database
| Parameter | Characteristic | NLN = 0~6 | NLN = 7~ | χ2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year of diagnosis | 9.597 | 0.002 | ||||
| 2004–2008 | 6656 | 672 | 5984 | |||
| 2009–2012 | 3844 | 463 | 3381 | |||
| Age | 60.255 | 0.000 | ||||
| <60 | 9236 | 918 | 8318 | |||
| ≥60 | 1264 | 217 | 1047 | |||
| Race | 56.815 | 0.000 | ||||
| White | 8389 | 829 | 7560 | |||
| Black | 956 | 170 | 786 | |||
| Others | 1155 | 136 | 1019 | |||
| Grade | 20.861 | 0.000 | ||||
| I/II | 4955 | 466 | 4489 | |||
| III/IV | 3394 | 395 | 2999 | |||
| Unknown | 2151 | 274 | 1877 | |||
| Primary Site | 0.649 | 0.885 | ||||
| Endocervix | 2377 | 256 | 2121 | |||
| Exocervix | 338 | 33 | 305 | |||
| Overlapping lesion | 343 | 40 | 303 | |||
| Cervix uteri | 7442 | 806 | 6636 | |||
| Histologic type | 9.019 | 0.011 | ||||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 7377 | 841 | 6536 | |||
| Adenocarcinoma | 2901 | 274 | 2627 | |||
| Mucinous adenocarcinoma | 222 | 20 | 202 | |||
| FIGO stage | 256.214 | 0.000 | ||||
| I | 7343 | 644 | 6699 | |||
| II | 1003 | 184 | 819 | |||
| III | 261 | 89 | 172 | |||
| IV | 32 | 11 | 21 | |||
| Unknown | 1861 | 207 | 1654 | |||
| Radiation | 168.765 | 0.000 | ||||
| No radiation | 7299 | 590 | 6639 | |||
| Radiation after surgery | 3271 | 545 | 2726 |
Univariate analysis of the influence of different NLN count on CSS in patients with cervical cancer
| NLN | No. | 5-year CCS | χ2 | NLN | No. | 5-year CCS | χ2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ≤0 | 49 | 40.8% | 160.499 | 0.000 | ≤12 | 3143 | 85.1% | 80.909 | 0.000 |
| >0 | 10451 | 89.6% | >12 | 7357 | 91.2% | ||||
| ≤1 | 173 | 60.0% | 173.818 | 0.000 | ≤13 | 3545 | 86.1% | 57.158 | 0.000 |
| >1 | 10327 | 89.8% | >13 | 6955 | 91.0% | ||||
| ≤2 | 349 | 68.4% | 169.186 | 0.000 | ≤14 | 3937 | 86.5% | 55.397 | 0.000 |
| >2 | 10151 | 90.1% | >14 | 6563 | 91.1% | ||||
| ≤3 | 482 | 70.4% | 214.406 | 0.000 | ≤15 | 4323 | 86.8% | 51.082 | 0.000 |
| >3 | 10018 | 90.3% | >15 | 6177 | 91.2% | ||||
| ≤4 | 670 | 73.4% | 220.302 | 0.000 | ≤16 | 4718 | 87.0% | 50.894 | 0.000 |
| >4 | 9830 | 90.4% | >16 | 5782 | 91.3% | ||||
| ≤5 | 867 | 75.4% | 213.032 | 0.000 | ≤17 | 5093 | 87.3% | 40.925 | 0.000 |
| >5 | 9633 | 90.6% | >17 | 5407 | 91.3% | ||||
| ≤6 | 1135 | 78.3% | 182.842 | 0.000 | ≤18 | 5444 | 87.5% | 44.011 | 0.000 |
| >6 | 9365 | 90.7% | >18 | 5056 | 91.3% | ||||
| ≤7 | 1404 | 80.2% | 149.141 | 0.000 | ≤19 | 5870 | 87.9% | 34.635 | 0.000 |
| >7 | 9096 | 90.8% | >19 | 4630 | 91.2% | ||||
| ≤8 | 1709 | 81.7% | 123.485 | 0.000 | ≤20 | 6202 | 88.0% | 32.770 | 0.000 |
| >8 | 8791 | 90.8% | >20 | 4298 | 91.3% | ||||
| ≤9 | 2059 | 83.2% | 100.117 | 0.000 | ≤21 | 6536 | 88.1% | 28.925 | 0.000 |
| >9 | 8441 | 90.9% | >21 | 3964 | 91.4% | ||||
| ≤10 | 2396 | 84.1% | 90.895 | 0.000 | ≤22 | 6872 | 88.3% | 24.252 | 0.000 |
| >10 | 8104 | 90.9% | >22 | 3628 | 91.3% | ||||
| ≤11 | 2761 | 84.4% | 91.926 | 0.000 | ≤23 | 7141 | 88.4% | 22.362 | 0.000 |
| >11 | 7739 | 91.1% | >23 | 3359 | 91.4% |
Figure 1X-tile analysis of survival data from the SEER registry
X-tile analysis was performed using patient data, equally divided into training and validation sets, from the SEER registry. X-tile plots of the training sets are shown in the left panels, with plots of matched validation sets shown in the smaller inset. The optimal cut-point highlighted by the black circle in the left panels is shown on a histogram of the entire cohort (middle panels), and a Kaplan-Meier plot (right panels). P values were determined using the cutoff point defined in the training set and applying it to the validation set. (The optimal cutoff value for NLN count is 6, χ2 = 183.95, P < 0.001).
Univariate and multivariate survival analysis of cervical cancer patients who received radical surgery
| Parameter | Characteristic | 3-year CCS | 5-year CCS | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Log rank χ2 test | HR (95%CI) | ||||||
| Year of diagnosis | 1.743 | 0.187 | NI | ||||
| 2004–2008 | 88.1% | 83.5% | |||||
| 2009–2012 | 88.9% | 82.3% | |||||
| Age | 77.726 | 0.000 | 0.002 | ||||
| <60 | 89.1% | 84.2% | Ref | ||||
| ≥60 | 83.1% | 74.5% | 0.805 (0.699~0.926) | 0.002 | |||
| Race | 12.908 | 0.002 | 0.009 | ||||
| White | 88.8% | 83.6% | Ref | ||||
| Black | 85.8% | 79.1% | 1.064 (0.895~1.265) | 0.482 | |||
| Others | 87..8% | 82.3% | 1.350 (1.082~1.685) | 0.008 | |||
| Grade | 156.785 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| I/II | 90.6% | 85.5% | Ref | ||||
| III/IV | 83.0% | 76.6% | 1.242 (1.037~1.488) | 0.019 | |||
| Unknown | 91.9% | 87.4% | 1.966 (1.645~2.349) | 0.000 | |||
| Primary Site | 24.410 | 0.000 | 0.266 | ||||
| Endocervix | 91.5% | 86.2% | Ref | ||||
| Exocervix | 87.9% | 84.3% | 0.858 (0.732~1.006) | 0.059 | |||
| Overlapping lesion | 87.8% | 83.1% | 0.987 (0.719~1.354) | 0.934 | |||
| Cervix uteri | 87.4% | 82.0% | 0.881 (0.646~1.200) | 0.421 | |||
| Histologic type | 70.867 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 87.0% | 81.3% | Ref | ||||
| Adenocarcinoma | 92.2% | 87.9% | 0.473 (0.353~0.633) | 0.000 | |||
| Mucinous adenocarcinoma | 84.7% | 76.1% | 0.544 0.404~0.733) | 0.000 | |||
| FIGO stage | 934.468 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| I | 92.4% | 88.0% | Ref | ||||
| II | 73.7% | 64.7% | 0.647 (0.560~0.748) | 0.000 | |||
| III | 58.2% | 48.7% | 1.406 (1.192~1.658) | 0.000 | |||
| IV | 21.8% | 15.6% | 2.367 (1.908~2.937) | 0.000 | |||
| Unknown | 85.9% | 79.2% | 6.989 (4.644~10.518) | 0.000 | |||
| Radiation | 608.573 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| No radiation | 92.9% | 89.0% | Ref | ||||
| Radiation after surgery | 78.4% | 69.9% | 0.321 (0.282~0.365) | 0.000 | |||
| NLN | 127.645 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| 0~6 | 78.3% | 71.8% | Ref | ||||
| 7~ | 89.6% | 84.4% | 1.571 (1.370~1.801) | 0.000 | |||
NI: not included in the multivariate survival analysis.
Figure 2Log-rank tests of CSS comparing patients with NLNs (≤6 VS >6) for (A) FIGO stage I: χ2 = 35.023, P < 0.001; (B) FIGO stage II: χ2 = 12.910, P < 0.001; and (C) FIGO stage III + IV: χ2 = 9.732, P = 0.002 and (D) Unknown stage: χ2 = 16.654, P < 0.001.
Univariate and multivariate analysis of NLN status on CSS of cervical cancer based on different cancer stage
| Parameter | NLN | 3-year CCS | 5-year CCS | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Log rank χ2 test | HR(95%CI) | ||||||
| FIGO stage | |||||||
| Stage I | 35.023 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| 0~6 | 89.0% | 83.2% | Ref | ||||
| 7~ | 92.7% | 88..5% | 1.685 (1.338~2.122) | 0.000 | |||
| Stage II | 12.910 | 0.000 | 0.002 | ||||
| 0~6 | 60.3% | 54.9% | Ref | ||||
| 7~ | 76.7% | 66.9% | 1.512 (1.163~1.965) | 0.002 | |||
| Stage III + IV | 9.732 | 0.002 | 0.005 | ||||
| 0~6 | 46.0% | 33.0% | Ref | ||||
| 7~ | 58.5% | 51.3% | 1.608 (1.154~2.242) | 0.005 | |||
| Unknown stage | 16.654 | 0.000 | 0.024 | ||||
| 0~6 | 76.8% | 70.0% | Ref | ||||
| 7~ | 87.1% | 80.4% | 1.438 (1.050~1.971) | 0.024 | |||
P-values refer to comparisons between two groups and were adjusted for age, race, grade, histologic type, FIGO stage and radiation after surgery as covariates.