Search

Background: Isolated positive para-aortic lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer is an uncommon event, ranging from 1% to 3%., Objective: Our aim was to evaluate the impact of sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping on the risk of isolated positive para-aortic lymph node metastasis., Methods: We retrospectively evaluated a series of 426 patients who underwent SLN mapping with at least one SLN detected from January 2013 to December 2021 (SLN group) compared with a historical series of 209 cases who underwent a systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy between June 2007 and April 2015 (LND group). Isolated para-aortic lymph node metastasis recurrences were included in the SLN group analysis., Results: In the SLN group, 168 cases (39.4%) had backup systematic lymphadenectomy, and 56 (13.1%) had positive lymph nodes compared with 34 (16.3%) in LND group (p=0.18). The SLN group had higher rates of minimally invasive surgeries (p<0.001) and presence of lymphovascular space invasion (p<0.001). Moreover, SLN group had fewer other uterine risk factors, such as high-grade tumors (p<0.001), and deep myometrial invasion (p<0.001). We found that SLN mapped outside the pelvis at pre-sacral, common iliac areas, and para-aortic regions in 2.8% (n=12), 11.5% (n=49), and 1.6% (n=7) of cases, respectively. Overall, 52 (12.2%) patients had positive SLNs, and 3 (5.7%) positive SLNs were found outside the pelvis-one in the pre-sacral region, one in the common iliac area, and one in the para-aortic region. An isolated para-aortic lymph node was found in only 2 (0.5%) cases in the SLN group compared with 7 (3.3%) cases in the LND group (p=0.004)., Conclusions: SLN protocol accurately predicts lymph node status and may decrease the risk of failed identification of isolated para-aortic lymph node metastasis compared with systematic lymphadenectomy., Competing Interests: Competing interests: GB reports honoraria and consulting from Astra Zeneca, GSK, and MSD., (© IGCS and ESGO 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To evaluate the prevalence of post-operative complications and quality of life (QoL) related to sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy vs systematic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer., Methods: A prospective cohort included women with early-stage endometrial carcinoma who underwent lymph node staging, grouped as follows: SLN group (sentinel lymph node only) and SLN+LND group (sentinel lymph node biopsy with addition of systematic lymphadenectomy). The patients had at least 12 months of follow-up, and QoL was assessed by European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cervical Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30) and EORTC-QLQ-Cx24. Lymphedema was also assessed by clinical evaluation and perimetry., Results: 152 patients were included: 113 (74.3%) in the SLN group and 39 (25.7%) in the SLN+LND group. Intra-operative surgical complications occurred in 2 (1.3%) cases, and all belonged to SLN+LND group. Patients undergoing SLN+LND had higher overall complication rates than those undergoing SLN alone (33.3% vs 14.2%; p=0.011), even after adjusting for confound factors (OR=3.45, 95% CI 1.40 to 8.47; p=0.007). The SLN+LND group had longer surgical time (p=0.001) and need for admission to the intensive care unit (p=0.001). Moreover, the incidence of lymphocele was found in eight cases in the SLN+LND group (0 vs 20.5%; p<0.001). There were no differences in lymphedema rate after clinical evaluation and perimetry. However, the lymphedema score was highest when lymphedema was reported by clinical examination at 6 months (30.1 vs 7.8; p<0.001) and at 12 months (36.3 vs 6.0; p<0.001). Regarding the overall assessment of QoL, there was no difference between groups at 12 months of follow-up., Conclusions: There was a higher overall rate of complications for the group undergoing systematic lymphadenectomy, as well as higher rates of lymphocele and lymphedema according to the symptom score. No difference was found in overall QoL between SLN and SLN+LND groups., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© IGCS and ESGO 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To evaluate the relation between mismatch repair (MMR) status and the risk of lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer, and whether this additional data can be incorporated to current SLN (sentinel lymph node) algorithm., Methods: We included a series of 332 women that underwent SLN mapping ± systematic lymphadenectomy from January 2013 to December 2021. Protein expressions of MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2 were examined by immuno-histochemistry and considered MMRd (deficient) when at least one protein was not expressed., Results: MMRd was noted in 20.8% of cases and correlated to grade 3 (p = 0.018) and presence of lymphovascular space invasion (p = 0.032). Moreover, MMRd was an independent risk factor for lymph node metastasis (OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.36-5.62). Notably, 21.7% (15/69) cases with MMRd had lymph node metastasis compared to 9.5% (25/263) of cases with MMRp (proficient) (p = 0.005). The overall and bilateral SLN detection rates were 91.9% and 75.9%, respectively. Of the 80 (24%) cases of non-bilateral SLN detection, 66.2% had low-grade tumors (G1/G2) and myometrial invasion <50%. Considering MMR status an independent prognostic factor for lymph node metastasis, a systematic lymphadenectomy (side specific or bilateral) would forgo in 53.7% (43/80) of cases with non-bilateral detection, representing 13% (43/332) of all endometroid tumors., Conclusion: MMR status was independently related to lymph node metastasis in endometrioid EC. Moreover, MMR status may help to select patients that can forgo systematic lymphadenectomy in case of undetected SLN., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Growing evidence suggest that sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in endometrial cancer accurately detects lymph node metastasis. However, prospective randomized trials addressing the oncological outcomes of SLN biopsy in endometrial cancer without lymphadenectomy are lacking., Primary Objectives: The present study aims to confirm that SLN biopsy without systematic node dissection does not negatively impact oncological outcomes., Study Hypothesis: We hypothesized that there is no survival benefit in adding systematic lymphadenectomy to sentinel node mapping for endometrial cancer staging. Additionally, we aim to evaluate morbidity and impact in quality of life (QoL) after forgoing systematic lymphadenectomy., Trial Design: This is a collaborative, multicenter, open-label, non-inferiority, randomized trial. After total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and SLN biopsy, patients will be randomized (1:1) into: (a) no further lymph node dissection or (b) systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy., Major Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: Inclusion criteria are patients with high-grade histologies (endometrioid G3, serous, clear cell, and carcinosarcoma), endometrioid G1 or G2 with imaging concerning for myometrial invasion of ≥50% or cervical invasion, clinically suitable to undergo systematic lymphadenectomy., Primary Endpoints: The primary objective is to compare 3-year disease-free survival and the secondary objectives are 5-year overall survival, morbidity, incidence of lower limb lymphedema, and QoL after SLN mapping ± systematic lymphadenectomy in high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer., Sample Size: 178 participants will be randomized in this study with an estimated date for completing accrual of December 2024 and presenting results in 2027., Trial Registration Number: NCT03366051., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© IGCS and ESGO 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: To analyze the survival outcomes of patients in a Brazilian cohort who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared with open surgery for early stage cervical cancer., Methods: A multicenter database was constructed, registering 1280 cervical cancer patients who had undergone radical hysterectomy from 2000 to 2019. For the final analysis, we included cases with a tumor ≤ 4 cm (stages Ia2 to Ib2, FIGO 2018) that underwent surgery from January 2007 to December 2017. Propensity score matching was also performed., Results: A total of 776 cases were ultimately analyzed, 526 of which were included in the propensity score matching analysis (open, n = 263; MIS, n = 263). There were 52 recurrences (9.9%), 28 (10.6%) with MIS and 24 (9.1%) with open surgery (p = 0.55); and 34 deaths were recorded, 13 (4.9%) and 21 (8.0%), respectively (p = 0.15). We noted a 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of 88.2% and 90.3% for those who received MIS and open surgery, respectively (HR 1.32; 95% CI: 0.76-2.29; p = 0.31) and a 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of 91.8% and 91.1%, respectively (HR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.40-1.61; p = 0.53). There was no difference in 3-year DFS rates between open surgery and MIS for tumors ≤ 2 cm (95.7% vs. 90.8%; p = 0.16) or > 2 cm (83.9% vs. 85.4%; p = 0.77). Also, the 5-year OS between open surgery and MIS did not differ for tumors ≤ 2 cm (93.1% vs. 93.6%; p = 0.82) or > 2 cm (88.9% vs. 89.8%; p = 0.35)., Conclusions: Survival outcomes were similar between minimally invasive and open radical hysterectomy in this large retrospective multicenter cohort., (© 2021. Society of Surgical Oncology.)