Gynecologic oncology · 2021
Long-term oncological safety of sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage cervical cancer: A post-hoc analysis of SENTICOL I and SENTICOL II cohorts.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Balaya Vincent, Guani Benedetta, Morice Philippe, Querleu Denis, Fourchotte Virginie, Leblanc Eric, Daraï Emile, Baron Marc, Marret Henri, Levêque Jean, Magaud Laurent, Mathevet Patrice, Lécuru Fabrice, SENTICOL Group
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare oncologic outcomes of patients with early-stage cervical cancer and negative nodes who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy alone (SLNB) versus pelvic lymphadenectomy (PL).
METHODS: An ancillary analysis of two prospective multicentric trials on SLN biopsy for cervical cancer (SENTICOL I and II) was conducted. Only patients with early-stage cervical cancer (IA to IIA FIGO stage), bilateral detection of SLN, negative SLN after ultrastaging and negative non-SLN after final pathologic examination were included. Risk-factors of recurrence and disease-specific mortality were determined by Cox proportional hazard models.
RESULTS: Between January 2005 and July 2012, 259 node-negative patients were analyzed: 87 in the SLNB group and 172 in the PL group. The median follow-up was 47 months [4-127]. During the follow-up, 21 patients (8.1%) experienced recurrences, including 4 nodal recurrences (1.9%), and 9 patients (3.5%) died of cervical cancer. Disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were similar between SLNB and PL groups, 85.1% vs. 80.4%, p = 0.24 and 90.8% vs. 97.2%, p = 0.22 respectively. By Cox multivariate analysis, SLNB compared to PL was not associated with DFS (HR = 1.78, 95%CI = [0.71-4.46], p = 0.22) neither with DSS (HR = 3.02, 95%CI = [0.69-13.18], p = 0.14). Only pathologic risk level according to the Sedlis criteria was an independent predictor of DFS and DSS.
CONCLUSIONS: Omitting full pelvic lymphadenectomy for patients with bilateral negative SLN does not seem to be associated with an increased risk of recurrence in this series. Survival non-inferiority needs to be confirmed by prospective trials.
METHODS: An ancillary analysis of two prospective multicentric trials on SLN biopsy for cervical cancer (SENTICOL I and II) was conducted. Only patients with early-stage cervical cancer (IA to IIA FIGO stage), bilateral detection of SLN, negative SLN after ultrastaging and negative non-SLN after final pathologic examination were included. Risk-factors of recurrence and disease-specific mortality were determined by Cox proportional hazard models.
RESULTS: Between January 2005 and July 2012, 259 node-negative patients were analyzed: 87 in the SLNB group and 172 in the PL group. The median follow-up was 47 months [4-127]. During the follow-up, 21 patients (8.1%) experienced recurrences, including 4 nodal recurrences (1.9%), and 9 patients (3.5%) died of cervical cancer. Disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were similar between SLNB and PL groups, 85.1% vs. 80.4%, p = 0.24 and 90.8% vs. 97.2%, p = 0.22 respectively. By Cox multivariate analysis, SLNB compared to PL was not associated with DFS (HR = 1.78, 95%CI = [0.71-4.46], p = 0.22) neither with DSS (HR = 3.02, 95%CI = [0.69-13.18], p = 0.14). Only pathologic risk level according to the Sedlis criteria was an independent predictor of DFS and DSS.
CONCLUSIONS: Omitting full pelvic lymphadenectomy for patients with bilateral negative SLN does not seem to be associated with an increased risk of recurrence in this series. Survival non-inferiority needs to be confirmed by prospective trials.