Multicenter study comparing oncologic outcomes between two nodal assessment methods in patients with deeply invasive endometrioid endometrial carcinoma: A sentinel lymph node algorithm versus a comprehensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy.

Overview

abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare oncologic outcomes in the staging of deeply invasive endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC) using a sentinel lymph node algorithm (SLN) versus pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy to the renal veins (LND); to compare outcomes in node-negative cases. METHODS: At two institutions, patients with deeply invasive (≥50% myometrial invasion) EEC were identified. One institution used LND (2004-2008), the other SLN (2005-2013). FIGO stage IV cases were excluded. Clinical characteristics and follow-up data were recorded. RESULTS: 176 patients were identified (LND, 94; SLN, 82). SLN patients were younger (p = 0.003) and had more LVSI (p < 0.001). 9.8% in the SLN and 29.8% in the LND cohorts, respectively, received no adjuvant therapy (p < 0.001). There was no association between type of assessment and recurrence; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR; LND vs. SLN) 0.87 (95%CI 0.40, 1.89) PFS. After controlling for age and adjuvant therapy, there was no association between assessment method and OS (aHR 2.54; 95%CI 0.81, 7.91). The node-negative cohort demonstrated no association between survival and assessment method: aHR 0.69 (95%CI 0.23, 2.03) PFS, 0.81 (95%CI 0.16, 4.22) OS. In the node-negative cohort, neither adjuvant EBRT+/-IVRT (HR 1.63; 95%CI 0.18, 14.97) nor adjuvant chemotherapy+/-EBRT+/-IVRT (HR 0.49; 95%CI 0.11, 2.22) were associated with OS, compared to no adjuvant therapy or IVRT-only. CONCLUSION: Use of an SLN algorithm in deeply invasive EEC does not impair oncologic outcomes. Survival is excellent in node-negative cases, irrespective of assessment method. Adjuvant chemotherapy in node-negative patients does not appear to impact outcome.