| Literature DB >> 35454878 |
Wan-Hua Ting1,2, Shu-Wei Hsieh3, Hui-Hua Chen1, Ming-Chow Wei1, Ho-Hsiung Lin1,4, Sheng-Mou Hsiao1,4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to elucidate the predictors for cancer recurrence in women with clinically uterine-confined endometrial cancer in the era of sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping.Entities:
Keywords: cytokeratin stain; endometrial cancer; lymphadenectomy; sentinel lymph node; ultrastaging
Year: 2022 PMID: 35454878 PMCID: PMC9031387 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14081973
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.575
Figure 1Sentinel lymph node mapping over right hemipelvis.
Comparisons of the baseline data and clinical outcomes between the traditional lymphadenectomy and sentinel lymph node mapping groups in women with clinically uterine-confined endometrial cancer (n = 334).
| Variables | Traditional | SLN | † |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 55.5 ± 10.0 | 57.3 ± 10.6 | 0.08 |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 27.0 ± 6.1 | 28.1 ± 4.4 | 0.04 |
| Operative method | |||
| Laparotomic staging | 178 (65) | 8 (13) | <0.001 |
| Laparoscopic staging | 61 (22) | 44 (71) | |
| Robotic staging | 33 (12) | 9 (15) | |
| ECOG score | |||
| 0 | 122 (45) | 22 (35) | 0.41 |
| 1 | 141 (52) | 39 (63) | |
| 2 | 5 (2) | 1 (0) | |
| 3 | 3 (1) | 0 (0) | |
| Parity | 2.1 ± 1.3 | 1.8 ± 1.3 | 0.23 |
| Endometrioid cell type | 229 (84) | 52 (84) | 0.70 |
| Cell grade | |||
| 1 | 125 (46) | 31 (50) | 0.21 |
| 2 | 91 (33) | 14 (23) | |
| 3 | 42 (15) | 15 (14) | |
| Deep (>1/2) myometrial invasion | 64 (24) | 15 (24) | 0.99 |
| Lymphovascular space invasion | 97 (36) | 21 (34) | 0.26 |
| Lymph node pelvic metastasis | 18 (7) | 5 (8) | 0.69 |
| Tumor size (cm) | 3.2 ± 2.6 | 2.4 ± 1.6 | 0.04 |
| Washing cytology | |||
| Malignant cell | 10 (4) | 2 (3) | 0.20 |
| Atypical cell | 53 (19) | 19 (31) | - |
| CA-125 (U/mL) | 61.6 ± 142.4 | 47.3 ± 142.4 | 0.59 |
| SLN mapping | |||
| Left hemipelvis | - | 51 (82) | - |
| Right hemipelvis | - | 49 (79) | - |
| Bilateral hemipelvis | - | 42 (68) | - |
| Unilateral hemipelvis | - | 16 (26) | - |
| Mapping failure | - | 4 (6) | - |
| Total number of dissected lymph nodes | 18.0 ± 9.8 | 11.3 ± 7.9 | <0.0001 |
| Total number of positive pelvic lymph nodes | 0.19 ± 0.97 | 0.18 ± 1.15 | 0.48 |
| Para-aortic lymph nodes dissection | 54 (20) | 8 (13) | <0.001 |
| Stage | 0.71 | ||
| IA | 187 (69) | 39 (63) | |
| IB | 46 (17) | 13 (21) | |
| II | 13 (5) | 2 (3) | |
| IIIA | 6 (2) | 2 (3) | |
| IIIC1 | 15 (6) | 4 (6) | |
| IIIC2 | 4 (1) | 1 (2) | |
| IVB | 1 (0) | 1 (2) | |
| Adjuvant radiotherapy | 135 (48) | 27 (44) | 0.47 |
| Adjuvant chemotherapy | 48 (11) | 12 (19) | 0.41 |
| Operation time (min) | 185 ± 72 | 209 ± 70 | 0.008 |
| Blood loss (mL) | 349 ± 300 | 196 ± 197 | <0.0001 |
| Complications | 74 (27) | 8 (13) | 0.02 |
| Lymphocyst/lymphedema | 33 (7) | 3 (5) | 0.11 |
| Average size of lymphocyst (cm) | 4.9 ± 2.2 | 2.5 ± 0.8 | 0.03 |
| Median follow-up (months) | 65.0 ± 39.9 | 22.6 ± 12.8 | <0.0001 |
| Recurrence | 20 (11) | 6 (10) | ‡ 0.24 |
| Death | 16 (6) | 4 (7) | ‡ 0.09 |
| Endometrial cancer related | 11 (4) | 1 (2) | ‡ 0.79 |
| Other causes (i.e., sepsis, | 5 (2) | 3 (5) | - |
Values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation or number (percentage). ECOG = Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; SLN = sentinel lymph node mapping. † Wilcoxon rank-sum test, chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. ‡ Log-rank test.
Figure 2Probabilities of (A) recurrence-free survival, (B) endometrial cancer-specific survival, and (C) overall survival between the traditional lymphadenectomy and sentinel lymph node mapping groups in women with clinically uterine-confined endometrial cancer (n = 334).
Location of detected sentinel lymph nodes in women who underwent sentinel lymph node mapping (n = 62).
| Location | Left Hemipelvis ( | Right Hemipelvis ( |
|---|---|---|
| External iliac | 38 (75) | 34 (69) |
| Obturator | 24 (47) | 26 (53) |
| Common iliac | 2 (4) | 3 (6) |
| Presacral | 0 (0) | 1 (2) |
| Para-aortic | 0 (0) | 2 (4) |
| Not specified | 5 (10) | 6 (12) |
Values are expressed as number (percentage).
Predictors for recurrence-free survival in women with clinically uterine confined endometrial cancer (n = 334).
| Variables | Univariate | Multivariable | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | † | Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | ‡ | |
| SLN mapping | 1.73 (0.69, 4.34) | 0.24 | 3.54 (0.52, 23.86) | 0.19 |
| Age (years) | 1.05 (1.01, 1.08) | 0.02 | 1.00 (0.94, 1.07) | 0.97 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.93 (0.87, 0.99) | 0.02 | 0.88 (0.74, 1.05) | 0.15 |
| ECOG scale | ||||
| 0 (reference) | 1.00 | - | - | - |
| 1 | 0.71 (0.33, 1.57) | 0.40 | - | - |
| 2 | 1.85 (0.24, 14.1) | 0.55 | - | - |
| 3 | 3.80 × 10−15 (0, infinity) | 1.00 | - | - |
| Parity | 1.20 (0.84, 1.73) | 0.31 | - | - |
| CA-125 (U/mL) | 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) | 0.91 | - | - |
| Surgical method | ||||
| Laparotomic (reference) | 1.00 | - | - | - |
| Laparoscopic | 1.15 (0.48, 2.75) | 0.75 | - | - |
| Robotic | 1.37 (0.45, 4.15) | 0.58 | - | - |
| Total number of dissected pelvic lymph node | 1.00 (0.96, 1.04) | 0.89 | - | - |
| Endometrioid cell type | 0.17 (0.08, 0.36) | <0.001 | 0.84 (0.17, 4.10) | 0.83 |
| Cell grade | ||||
| 1 (reference) | 1.00 | - | 1.00 | - |
| 2 | 7.90 (1.73, 36.1) | 0.008 | 3.57 (0.37, 34.85) | 0.27 |
| 3 | 19.9 (4.46, 89.2) | <0.001 | 7.13 (0.63, 80.85) | 0.11 |
| Deep (>1/2) myometrial invasion | 2.59 (1.18, 5.71) | 0.02 | 0.47 (0.10, 2.33) | 0.36 |
| LVSI | 4.75 (1.89, 11.98) | 0.001 | 0.75 (0.16, 3.55) | 0.72 |
| Tumor size (cm) | 1.01 (1.01,1.02) | <0.001 | 1.01 (0.99, 1.04) | 0.28 |
| Pelvic lymph node metastasis | 6.90 (3.00, 15.88) | <0.001 | 1.52 (0.29, 7.95) | 0.62 |
| Para-aortic lymph node metastasis | 12.74 (3.90, 41.59) | <0.001 | 7.60 (1.28, 45.16) | 0.03 |
| Ascites cytology. | ||||
| Normal cell | 1.00 | - | - | - |
| Atypical cell | 1.79 (0.76,4.21) | 0.19 | - | - |
| Malignant cell | 2.51 (0.57, 11.00) | 0.22 | - | - |
| Stage | ||||
| IA | 1.00 (reference) | - | ||
| IB | 2.56 (0.99, 6.59) | 0.052 | ||
| II | 1.70 × 10−15 (0, infinity) | 1.00 | ||
| IIIA | 1.71 × 10−15 (0, infinity) | 1.00 | ||
| IIIC1 | 4.77 (1.52, 14.97) | 0.008 | ||
| IIIC2 | 14.6 (4.05, 52.79) | <0.001 | ||
| IVB | 22.76 (2.79, 185.42) | 0.003 |
BMI = body mass index; CI = confidence interval; ECOG = Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; LVSI = lymphovascular space invasion; SLN = sentinel lymph node mapping. † Univariate Cox proportional hazards model. ‡ Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model by using clinically interested variables and all variables with p < 0.05. The variable “stage” was excluded in the multivariable analysis owing to its significant correlation with positive para-aortic lymph node metastasis (Spearman’s rho = 0.38, p < 0.001.). In addition, the use of sentinel lymph node mapping was included in this model owing to clinical interest.
Figure 3Total number of dissected pelvic lymph nodes versus the number of women across time in the sentinel lymph node group (n = 62).
Predictors of lymph node metastasis.
| Variables | Univariate | Multivariate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| SLN mapping | 1.11 (0.40, 3.07) | 0.85 | 0.73 (0.24, 2.24) | 0.58 |
| Cytokeratin IHC staining | 2.69 (1.06, 6.86) | 0.04 | 3.04 (1.09, 8.44) | 0.03 |
CI = confidence interval; IHC = immunohistochemistry; SLN = sentinel lymph node. † Univariate logistic regression analysis. ‡ Multivariable logistic regression analysis by using all variables in the univariate analysis.