-
Something wrong with this record ?
Prognostic significance of low volume sentinel lymph node disease in early-stage cervical cancer
D. Cibula, NR. Abu-Rustum, L. Dusek, M. Zikán, A. Zaal, L. Sevcik, GG. Kenter, D. Querleu, R. Jach, AS. Bats, G. Dyduch, P. Graf, J. Klat, J. Lacheta, CJ. Meijer, E. Mery, R. Verheijen, RP. Zweemer,
Language English Country United States
Document type Journal Article
- MeSH
- Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Lymphatic Metastasis MeSH
- Lymph Nodes pathology MeSH
- Uterine Cervical Neoplasms pathology MeSH
- Predictive Value of Tests MeSH
- Disease-Free Survival MeSH
- Prognosis MeSH
- Retrospective Studies MeSH
- Neoplasm Staging MeSH
- Check Tag
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate prognostic significance of low volume disease detected in sentinel nodes (SN) of patients with early stages cervical cancer. Although pathologic ultrastaging of SN allows for identification of low volume disease, including micro-metastasis and isolated tumor cells (ITC), in up to 15% of cases, prognostic significance of these findings is unknown. METHODS: A total of 645 records from 8 centers were retrospectively reviewed. Enrolled in our study were patients with early-stage cervical cancer who had undergone surgical treatment including SN biopsy followed by pelvic lymphadenectomy and pathologic ultrastaging of SN. RESULTS: Macrometastasis, micrometastasis, and ITC were detected by SN ultrastaging in 14.7%, 10.1%, and 4.5% patients respectively. False negativity of SN ultrastaging reached 2.8%. The presence of ITC was not associated with significant risk, both for recurrence free survival and overall survival. Overall survival was significantly reduced in patients with macrometastasis and micrometastasis; hazard ratio for overall survival reached 6.85 (95% CI, 2.59-18.05) and 6.86 (95% CI, 2.09-22.61) respectively. Presence of micrometastasis was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in a multivariable model. CONCLUSION: Presence of micrometastasis in SN in patients with early stage cervical cancer was associated with significant reduction of overall survival, which was equivalent to patients with macrometastasis. No prognostic significance was found for ITC. These data highlight the importance of SN biopsy and pathologic ultrastaging for the management of cervical cancer.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc12024240
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20121207103717.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 120815s2012 xxu f 000 0#eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.11.037 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)22120175
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Cibula, D $u Gynecological Oncology Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. david.cibula@iol.cz
- 245 10
- $a Prognostic significance of low volume sentinel lymph node disease in early-stage cervical cancer / $c D. Cibula, NR. Abu-Rustum, L. Dusek, M. Zikán, A. Zaal, L. Sevcik, GG. Kenter, D. Querleu, R. Jach, AS. Bats, G. Dyduch, P. Graf, J. Klat, J. Lacheta, CJ. Meijer, E. Mery, R. Verheijen, RP. Zweemer,
- 520 9_
- $a OBJECTIVE: Evaluate prognostic significance of low volume disease detected in sentinel nodes (SN) of patients with early stages cervical cancer. Although pathologic ultrastaging of SN allows for identification of low volume disease, including micro-metastasis and isolated tumor cells (ITC), in up to 15% of cases, prognostic significance of these findings is unknown. METHODS: A total of 645 records from 8 centers were retrospectively reviewed. Enrolled in our study were patients with early-stage cervical cancer who had undergone surgical treatment including SN biopsy followed by pelvic lymphadenectomy and pathologic ultrastaging of SN. RESULTS: Macrometastasis, micrometastasis, and ITC were detected by SN ultrastaging in 14.7%, 10.1%, and 4.5% patients respectively. False negativity of SN ultrastaging reached 2.8%. The presence of ITC was not associated with significant risk, both for recurrence free survival and overall survival. Overall survival was significantly reduced in patients with macrometastasis and micrometastasis; hazard ratio for overall survival reached 6.85 (95% CI, 2.59-18.05) and 6.86 (95% CI, 2.09-22.61) respectively. Presence of micrometastasis was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in a multivariable model. CONCLUSION: Presence of micrometastasis in SN in patients with early stage cervical cancer was associated with significant reduction of overall survival, which was equivalent to patients with macrometastasis. No prognostic significance was found for ITC. These data highlight the importance of SN biopsy and pathologic ultrastaging for the management of cervical cancer.
- 650 _2
- $a přežití bez známek nemoci $7 D018572
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a lymfatické uzliny $x patologie $7 D008198
- 650 _2
- $a lymfatické metastázy $7 D008207
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a staging nádorů $7 D009367
- 650 _2
- $a prediktivní hodnota testů $7 D011237
- 650 _2
- $a prognóza $7 D011379
- 650 _2
- $a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
- 650 _2
- $a biopsie sentinelové lymfatické uzliny $7 D021701
- 650 _2
- $a nádory děložního čípku $x patologie $7 D002583
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Abu-Rustum, N R $7 gn_A_00000925
- 700 1_
- $a Dusek, L
- 700 1_
- $a Zikán, M
- 700 1_
- $a Zaal, A
- 700 1_
- $a Sevcik, L
- 700 1_
- $a Kenter, G G
- 700 1_
- $a Querleu, D
- 700 1_
- $a Jach, R
- 700 1_
- $a Bats, A S
- 700 1_
- $a Dyduch, G
- 700 1_
- $a Graf, P
- 700 1_
- $a Klat, J
- 700 1_
- $a Lacheta, J
- 700 1_
- $a Meijer, C J L M
- 700 1_
- $a Mery, E
- 700 1_
- $a Verheijen, R
- 700 1_
- $a Zweemer, R P
- 773 0_
- $w MED00001958 $t Gynecologic oncology $x 1095-6859 $g Roč. 124, č. 3 (2012), s. 496-501
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22120175 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y m
- 990 __
- $a 20120815 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20121207103751 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 946388 $s 781568
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2012 $b 124 $c 3 $d 496-501 $i 1095-6859 $m Gynecologic oncology $n Gynecol Oncol $x MED00001958
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20120815/12/02