| Literature DB >> 29963935 |
Yi-Fang Dai1, Mu Xu1, Li-Ying Zhong1, Xiao-Yan Xie1, Zhao-Dong Liu1, Ming-Xing Yan1, Huan Yi1, Dan-Mei Lin1.
Abstract
Objective To investigate the prognostic significance of and risk factors for solitary lymph node metastasis (SLNM) of patients with cervical carcinoma. Methods Clinical data from patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages IA2 to IIA cervical carcinoma who underwent radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy between January 2003 and December 2010 were analysed retrospectively. Histopathological analysis was used to identify SLNM. Long-term survival and risk factors associated with SLNM were analysed. Results The study enrolled 302 patients with cervical cancer: 48 with SLNM (SLNM group) and 254 patients with no lymph node metastases (nLNM group). FIGO stage, tumour grade, depth of tumour invasion, uterine body involvement, parametrial involvement and lymphovascular invasion differed significantly between the two groups. Logistic regression analysis revealed that FIGO stage, depth of tumour invasion and lymphovascular invasion were independent factors associated with SLNM. The 5-year survival rates of the SLNM and nLNM groups were 54.2% and 87.8%, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified SLNM as an independent factor affecting survival. Conclusions The occurrence of just one solitary lymph node metastasis significantly worsened the prognosis in patients with cervical carcinoma compared with patients without lymph node metastases.Entities:
Keywords: Cervical carcinoma; lymph node metastasis; survival
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29963935 PMCID: PMC6166324 DOI: 10.1177/0300060518785827
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int Med Res ISSN: 0300-0605 Impact factor: 1.671
Comparison of the clinicopathologic characteristics between patients with solitary lymph node metastasis (SLNM group) and patients without lymph node metastasis (nLNM group).
| Characteristic | SLNM group | nLNM group | Statistical significance[ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 46.2 ± 8.7 | 44.9 ± 7.4 | NS |
| FIGO stage | |||
| IA2 | 0(0.0) | 34 (13.4) | |
| IB | 14 (29.2) | 111 (43.7) | |
| IIA | 34 (70.8) | 109 (42.9) | |
| Tumour size, cm | NS | ||
| ≥4 | 24 (50.0) | 132 (52.0) | |
| <4 | 24 (50.0) | 122 (48.0) | |
| Tumour grade | |||
| Well differentiated | 2 (4.2) | 32 (12.6) | |
| Moderately differentiated | 6 (12.5) | 58 (22.8) | |
| Poorly differentiated | 40 (83.3) | 164 (64.6) | |
| Depth of tumour invasion | |||
| T1 | 8 (16.7) | 134 (52.8) | |
| T2 | 30 (62.5) | 110 (43.3) | |
| T3 | 10 (20.8) | 10 (3.9) | |
| Pathological cell type | NS | ||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 40 (83.3) | 234 (92.1) | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 6 (12.5) | 16 (6.3) | |
| Adenosquamous | 2 (4.2) | 4 (1.6) | |
| Uterine body involvement | |||
| Yes | 8 (16.7) | 10 (3.9) | |
| No | 40 (83.3) | 244 (96.1) | |
| Parametrial involvement | |||
| Yes | 10 (20.8) | 12 (4.7) | |
| No | 38 (79.2) | 242 (95.3) | |
| Number of dissected lymph nodes | 21.7 ± 6.8 | 21.2 ± 8.1 | NS |
| Lymphovascular invasion | |||
| Positive | 24 (50.0) | 36 (14.2) | |
| Negative | 24 (50.0) | 218 (85.8) | |
| Ovarian shift | NS | ||
| Yes | 6 (12.5) | 56 (22.0) | |
| No | 42 (87.5) | 198 (78.0) |
Data presented as mean ± SD or n of patients (%).
aThe two groups were compared using Student’s t-test for continuous variables and χ2-test for categorical variables.
FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; T1, invasive <1/2 muscle layer; T2, invasive ≥1/2 muscle layer; T3, invasive cervical internal surface; NS, no significant between-group difference (P ≥0.05).
Multivariate logistic regression analysis of the risk for solitary lymph node metastasis.
| Parameter | β | SE | Wald | Statistical significance | Risk ratio | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FIGO stage | 0.722 | 0.352 | 4.194 | 2.058 | 1.032, 4.106 | |
| Tumour grade | 0.386 | 0.343 | 1.092 | NS | 0.260 | 0.751, 2.879 |
| Depth of tumour invasion | 0.979 | 0.323 | 9.182 | 2.662 | 1.413, 5.014 | |
| Uterine body involvement | –0.841 | 0.689 | 1.490 | NS | 0.431 | 0.112, 1.665 |
| Parametrial involvement | –0.266 | 0.646 | 0.170 | NS | 0.766 | 0.216, 2.716 |
| Lymphovascular invasion | –0.863 | 0.415 | 4.323 | 0.422 | 0.187, 0.952 |
CI, confidence interval; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; NS, no significant association (P ≥ 0.05).
Figure 1.Comparison of the Kaplan-Meier survival curves between patients with solitary lymph node metastasis (SLNM group) and patients without lymph node metastasis (nLNM group) (P < 0.001; log-rank test).
Univariate analysis of prognostic factors for survival in patients with and without solitary lymph node metastasis (SLNM).
| Parameter |
| 5-year overall survival rate, % | χ2 | Statistical significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.938 | NS | ||
| <40 | 68 | 74.5 | ||
| ≥40 | 234 | 78.9 | ||
| FIGO stage | 17.397 | |||
| IA2 | 34 | 94.1 | ||
| IB | 125 | 88.5 | ||
| IIA | 143 | 74.3 | ||
| Tumour size (cm) | 9.189 | |||
| <4 | 156 | 87.0 | ||
| ≥4 | 146 | 77.4 | ||
| Tumour grade | 33.018 | |||
| Well differentiated | 274 | 84.9 | ||
| Moderately differentiated | 22 | 45.5 | ||
| Poorly differentiated | 6 | 100.0 | ||
| Depth of tumour invasion | 67.827 | |||
| T1 | 142 | 93.0 | ||
| T2 | 140 | 81.4 | ||
| T3 | 20 | 40.0 | ||
| Pathological cell type | 0.428 | NS | ||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 34 | 88.2 | ||
| Adenocarcinoma | 64 | 80.4 | ||
| Adenosquamous | 204 | 82.1 | ||
| Uterine body metastasis | 19.554 | |||
| Yes | 18 | 50.0 | ||
| No | 284 | 84.8 | ||
| Lymphovascular invasion | 66.991 | |||
| Positive | 60 | 52.6 | ||
| Negative | 242 | 89.8 | ||
| Parametrial involvement | 36.712 | |||
| Yes | 22 | 13.6 | ||
| No | 280 | 87.6 | ||
| Postoperative treatment | 7.237 | |||
| None | 153 | 87.6 | ||
| Radiation therapy | 28 | 77.3 | ||
| Chemoradiation | 121 | 71.5 | ||
| SLNM | 41.487 | |||
| Yes | 48 | 87.7 | ||
| No | 254 | 54.2 | ||
| Ovarian shift | 5.187 | |||
| Yes | 62 | 93.5 | ||
| No | 240 | 75.4 |
FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; T1, invasive <1/2 muscle layer; T2, invasive ≥1/2 muscle layer; T3, invasive cervical internal surface; NS, no significant association (P ≥0.05).
Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors for survival in patients with and without solitary lymph node metastasis (SLNM).
| Parameter | β | SE | Wald | Statistical significance | Risk ratio | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FIGO stage | 0.416 | NS | ||||
| IB versus IA2 | –0.022 | 0.832 | 0.001 | NS | 0.978 | 0.191, 5.002 |
| IIA versus IA2 | –0.215 | 0.347 | 0.385 | NS | 0.807 | 0.409, 1.591 |
| Tumour size | –0.360 | 0.337 | 1.135 | NS | 0.698 | 0.360, 1.352 |
| Tumour grade | 0.746 | 0.252 | 8.720 | 2.108 | 1.285, 3.457 | |
| Depth of tumour invasion | 6.719 | |||||
| T2 versus T1 | –1.272 | 0.537 | 5.604 | 0.280 | 0.098, 0.803 | |
| T3 versus T1 | –1.025 | 0.421 | 5.914 | 0.359 | 0.157, 0.820 | |
| Uterine body metastasis | 0.555 | 0.515 | 1.157 | NS | 1.741 | 0.634, 4.782 |
| Lymphovascular invasion | –0.725 | 0.390 | 3.463 | NS | 0.484 | 0.226, 1.039 |
| Parametrial involvement | –0.725 | 0.437 | 17.310 | 0.162 | 0.069, 0.382 | |
| Postoperative treatment | 0.703 | 0.564 | 1.665 | NS | 1.734 | 0.769, 5.463 |
| SLNM | 0.955 | 0.302 | 9.973 | 2.598 | 1.437, 4.700 | |
| Ovarian shift | 0.514 | 0.474 | 1.177 | NS | 1.672 | 0.661, 4.229 |
CI, confidence interval; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; T1, invasive <1/2 muscle layer; T2, invasive ≥ 1/2 muscle layer; T3, invasive cervical internal surface; NS, no significant association (P ≥ 0.05).