41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    4
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Survival analysis of pelvic lymphadenectomy alone versus combined pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy in patients exhibiting endometrioid type endometrial cancer

      research-article
      ,
      Oncology Letters
      D.A. Spandidos
      endometrial cancer, endometrioid type, lymphadenectomy, survival

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The therapeutic benefit of lymphadenectomy in patients exhibiting endometrial cancer (EC) remains controversial. The aim of the present study was to determine whether the addition of para-aortic lymphadenectomy to pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLND) improves survival in patients with endometrioid type EC. A single tertiary-center, retrospective analysis was conducted in a total of 186 patients who were surgically treated with either PLND alone (n=97) or combined pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy (PPaLND; n=89). Adjuvant treatments were assigned according to the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) risk of recurrence analysis. The primary endpoint of the present study was progression-free survival (PFS). The median follow-up time was 38 months (95% confidence interval, 36.47–42.90) for all patients. No statistically significant differences were identified between the two groups in terms of overall survival (OS), PFS or time to progression (TTP). Kaplan-Meier estimates of three-year OS, PFS and TTP for patients with low or low-intermediate risk were as follows: PLND, 100, 98.7 and 98.7%, respectively; and PPaLND, all 100%. The estimated three-year OS, PFS and TTP for patients with high or high-intermediate risk were as follows: PLND, 92.3, 81.3 and 81.3%; and PPaLND, 90.7, 77.1 and 80.9%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were detected in the three-year OS, PFS and TTP between the lymphadenectomy groups, regardless of the GOG risk of recurrence (PLND, 98.4, 95.3 and 95.3%; and PPaLND, 94.9, 87.1 and 89.4%). Therefore, the combination treatment, PPaLND did not provide any survival advantage over pelvic lymphadenectomy alone.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Efficacy of systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC trial): a randomised study

            (2009)
            Summary Background Hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) is the standard surgery for stage I endometrial cancer. Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy has been used to establish whether there is extra-uterine disease and as a therapeutic procedure; however, randomised trials need to be done to assess therapeutic efficacy. The ASTEC surgical trial investigated whether pelvic lymphadenectomy could improve survival of women with endometrial cancer. Methods From 85 centres in four countries, 1408 women with histologically proven endometrial carcinoma thought preoperatively to be confined to the corpus were randomly allocated by a minimisation method to standard surgery (hysterectomy and BSO, peritoneal washings, and palpation of para-aortic nodes; n=704) or standard surgery plus lymphadenectomy (n=704). The primary outcome measure was overall survival. To control for postsurgical treatment, women with early-stage disease at intermediate or high risk of recurrence were randomised (independent of lymph-node status) into the ASTEC radiotherapy trial. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN 16571884. Findings After a median follow-up of 37 months (IQR 24–58), 191 women (88 standard surgery group, 103 lymphadenectomy group) had died, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·16 (95% CI 0·87–1·54; p=0·31) in favour of standard surgery and an absolute difference in 5-year overall survival of 1% (95% CI −4 to 6). 251 women died or had recurrent disease (107 standard surgery group, 144 lymphadenectomy group), with an HR of 1·35 (1·06–1·73; p=0·017) in favour of standard surgery and an absolute difference in 5-year recurrence-free survival of 6% (1–12). With adjustment for baseline characteristics and pathology details, the HR for overall survival was 1·04 (0·74–1·45; p=0·83) and for recurrence-free survival was 1·25 (0·93–1·66; p=0·14). Interpretation Our results show no evidence of benefit in terms of overall or recurrence-free survival for pelvic lymphadenectomy in women with early endometrial cancer. Pelvic lymphadenectomy cannot be recommended as routine procedure for therapeutic purposes outside of clinical trials. Funding Medical Research Council and National Cancer Research Network.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial.

              Pelvic lymph nodes are the most common site of extrauterine tumor spread in early-stage endometrial cancer, but the clinical impact of lymphadenectomy has not been addressed in randomized studies. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to determine whether the addition of pelvic systematic lymphadenectomy to standard hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy improves overall and disease-free survival. From October 1, 1996, through March 31, 2006, 514 eligible patients with preoperative International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I endometrial carcinoma were randomly assigned to undergo pelvic systematic lymphadenectomy (n = 264) or no lymphadenectomy (n = 250). Patients' clinical data, pathological tumor characteristics, and operative and early postoperative data were recorded at discharge from hospital. Late postoperative complications, adjuvant therapy, and follow-up data were collected 6 months after surgery. Survival was analyzed by use of the log-rank test and a Cox multivariable regression analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided. The median number of lymph nodes removed was 30 (interquartile range = 22-42) in the pelvic systematic lymphadenectomy arm and 0 (interquartile range = 0-0) in the no-lymphadenectomy arm (P < .001). Both early and late postoperative complications occurred statistically significantly more frequently in patients who had received pelvic systematic lymphadenectomy (81 patients in the lymphadenectomy arm and 34 patients in the no-lymphadenectomy arm, P = .001). Pelvic systematic lymphadenectomy improved surgical staging as statistically significantly more patients with lymph node metastases were found in the lymphadenectomy arm than in the no-lymphadenectomy arm (13.3% vs 3.2%, difference = 10.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.3% to 14.9%, P < .001). At a median follow-up of 49 months, 78 events (ie, recurrence or death) had been observed and 53 patients had died. The unadjusted risks for first event and death were similar between the two arms (hazard ratio [HR] for first event = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.70 to 1.71, P = .68, and HR for death = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.70 to 2.07, P = .50). The 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates in an intention-to-treat analysis were similar between arms (81.0% and 85.9% in the lymphadenectomy arm and 81.7% and 90.0% in the no-lymphadenectomy arm, respectively). Although systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy statistically significantly improved surgical staging, it did not improve disease-free or overall survival.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Oncol Lett
                Oncol Lett
                OL
                Oncology Letters
                D.A. Spandidos
                1792-1074
                1792-1082
                January 2015
                31 October 2014
                31 October 2014
                : 9
                : 1
                : 355-364
                Affiliations
                Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Division of Gynaecologic Oncological Surgery, Akdeniz University Hospital, Antalya, Konyaaltı 07070, Turkey
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Dr Tayfun Toptas, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Division of Gynaecologic Oncological Surgery, Akdeniz University Hospital, Dumlupinar Bul. H-Blok K1, Antalya, Konyaaltı 07070, Turkey, E-mail: drttoptas@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                ol-09-01-0355
                10.3892/ol.2014.2653
                4246997
                25435992
                5234545d-70b8-4f0e-b4ce-91cb26b98a92
                Copyright © 2015, Spandidos Publications

                This is an open-access article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. The article may be redistributed, reproduced, and reused for non-commercial purposes, provided the original source is properly cited.

                History
                : 13 January 2014
                : 08 September 2014
                Categories
                Articles

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                endometrial cancer,endometrioid type,lymphadenectomy,survival
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                endometrial cancer, endometrioid type, lymphadenectomy, survival

                Comments

                Comment on this article