Next Article in Journal
Abnormalities on Perfusion CT and Intervention for Intracranial Hypertension in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury
Previous Article in Journal
Left Ventricular Geometry and Replacement Fibrosis Detected by cMRI Are Associated with Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Nonischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Previous Article in Special Issue
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Promising Choice for Endometrial Cancer Patients?
Open AccessArticle

Low-Volume Nodal Metastasis in Endometrial Cancer: Risk Factors and Prognostic Significance

Gynecologic Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital—IdiPAZ, 28046 Madrid, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9(6), 1999; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9061999
Received: 8 May 2020 / Revised: 18 June 2020 / Accepted: 22 June 2020 / Published: 25 June 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Endometrial Cancer: Latest Advances and Prospects)
Objective: To evaluate the oncological outcomes of patients with low-volume metastasis compared to those with macrometastasis and negative nodes in endometrial cancer. Methods: A single institutional retrospective study was carried out, which included all patients with endometrial cancer who underwent surgical treatment between January 2007 and December 2016. We analyzed the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of all patients after sentinel node biopsy and full nodal surgical staging according to their final pathological nodal status, focusing on the impact of the size of nodal metastasis. Results: A total of 270 patients were operated on during the study period; among them, 230 (85.2%) patients underwent nodal staging. On final pathology, 196 (85.2%) patients had negative lymph nodes; low-volume metastasis (LVM) was present in 14 (6.1%) patients: 6 (2.6%) patients had isolated tumor cells (ITCs) and 8 (3.5%) patients presented just micrometastasis; additionally, 20 (8.7%) patients presented macrometastasis. After a median (range) follow-up of 60 (0–146) months, patients with macrometastasis showed a significantly worse PFS compared to LVM and node-negative patients (61.1% vs. 71.4% vs. 83.2%, respectively; p = 0.018), and similar results were obtained for 5-year OS (50% vs. 78.6% vs. 81.5%, respectively; p < 0.001). Half of the patients presenting LVM did not receive adjuvant treatment. Moreover, LVM had a moderate nonsignificant decrease in 5-year PFS compared to node-negative patients. Conclusions: Patients with endometrial cancer and low-volume nodal metastasis demonstrated a better prognosis than those presenting macrometastasis. Low-volume metastasis did not show worse oncological outcomes than node-negative patients, although there was a slight decrease in progression-free survival. View Full-Text
Keywords: low-volume metastasis; ultrastaging; endometrial cancer; sentinel node biopsy low-volume metastasis; ultrastaging; endometrial cancer; sentinel node biopsy
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

García Pineda, V.; Hernández Gutiérrez, A.; Gracia Segovia, M.; Siegrist Ridruejo, J.; Diestro Tejeda, M.D.; Zapardiel, I. Low-Volume Nodal Metastasis in Endometrial Cancer: Risk Factors and Prognostic Significance. J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9, 1999.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop