Factors influencing the adoption of the sentinel lymph node technique for endometrial cancer staging: an international survey of gynecologic oncologists

. 2019 Jan ; 29 (1) : 60-67.

Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie, Anglie Médium print

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/pmid30640685

Grantová podpora
P30 CA008748 NCI NIH HHS - United States

OBJECTIVE: To explore the factors influencing adoption of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) technique for endometrial cancer staging among gynecologic oncologists. METHODS: A self-administered, web-based survey was sent via email (April 20 through May 21, 2017) to all members of European Society of Gynecologic Oncologists, International Gynecologic Cancer Society, and Society of Gynecologic Oncologists. Surgical and pathologic practices related to SLN and reasons for not adopting this technique were investigated. RESULTS: Overall, 489 attending physicians or consultants in gynecologic oncology from 69 countries responded: 201 (41.1%), 118 (24.1%), and 117 (23.9%) from Europe, the USA, and other countries, respectively (10.8% did not report a country). SLN was adopted by 246 (50.3%) respondents, with 93.1% injecting the cervix and 62.6 % using indocyanine green dye. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network SLN algorithm was followed by 160 (65.0%) respondents (USA 74.4%, Europe 55.4%, other countries 71.4%). However, 66.7% completed a backup lymphadenectomy in high-risk patients. When SLN biopsy revealed isolated tumor cells, 13.8% of respondents recommended adjuvant therapy. This percentage increased to 52% if micrometastases were detected. Among the 243 not adopting SLN, 50.2% cited lack of evidence and 45.3% stated that inadequate instrumentation fueled their decisions. CONCLUSIONS: SLN with a cervical injection is gaining widespread acceptance for staging of endometrial cancer among gynecologic oncologists worldwide. Standardization of the surgical approach with the National Comprehensive Care Network algorithm is applied by most users. Management of isolated tumor cells and the role of backup lymphadenectomy for 'high-risk' cases remain areas of investigation.

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68: 7–30. PubMed

Colombo N, Creutzberg C, Amant F et al. ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO Consensus Conference on Endometrial Cancer: Diagnosis, Treatment and Follow-up. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016;26: 2–30. PubMed PMC

Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM, et al. Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group Study LAP2. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5331–6. PubMed PMC

Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM, et al. Recurrence and survival after random assignment to laparoscopy versus laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group LAP2 Study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:695–700. PubMed PMC

Corrado G, Cutillo G, Pomati G et al. Surgical and oncological outcome of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic and abdominal surgery in the management of endometrial cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41: 1074–81. PubMed

Casarin J, Multinu F, Ubl DS et al. Adoption of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Decrease in Surgical Morbidity for Endometrial Cancer Treatment in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131: 304–11. PubMed

Fleming ND, Soliman PT, Westin SN et al. Impact of Lymph Node Ratio and Adjuvant Therapy in Node-Positive Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015;25: 1437–44. PubMed PMC

Dowdy SC, Borah BJ, Bakkum-Gamez JN et al. Prospective assessment of survival, morbidity, and cost associated with lymphadenectomy in low-risk endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127: 5–10. PubMed

Mariani A, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA et al. Prospective assessment of lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer: a paradigm shift in surgical staging. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;109: 11–8. PubMed PMC

Achouri A, Huchon C, Bats AS et al. Complications of lymphadenectomy for gynecologic cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39: 81–6. PubMed

Yost KJ, Cheville AL, Al-Hilli MM et al. Lymphedema after surgery for endometrial cancer: prevalence, risk factors, and quality of life. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124: 307–15. PubMed PMC

Bogani G, Multinu F, Dowdy SC et al. Incorporating robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer staging: Analysis of morbidity and costs. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;141: 218–24. PubMed

Abu-Rustum NR. Sentinel lymph node mapping for endometrial cancer: a modern approach to surgical staging. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014;12: 288–97. PubMed

Rossi EC, Kowalski LD, Scalici J et al. A comparison of sentinel lymph node biopsy to lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer staging (FIRES trial): a multicentre, prospective, cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18: 384–92. PubMed

Holloway RW, Abu-Rustum NR, Backes FJ et al. Sentinel lymph node mapping and staging in endometrial cancer: A Society of Gynecologic Oncology literature review with consensus recommendations. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;146: 405–15. PubMed PMC

Koh WJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Bean S et al. Uterine Neoplasms, Version 1.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018;16: 170–99. PubMed

American Association For Public Opinion Research. Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys. 9th ed: AAPOR; 2016.

Leitao MM Jr., Khoury-Collado F, Gardner G et al. Impact of incorporating an algorithm that utilizes sentinel lymph node mapping during minimally invasive procedures on the detection of stage IIIC endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;129: 38–41. PubMed

The World Bank. Databank. 2018.

Bodurtha Smith AJ, Fader AN, Tanner EJ. Sentinel lymph node assessment in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216: 459–76 e10. PubMed

Tanner EJ, Sinno AK, Stone RL et al. Factors associated with successful bilateral sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;138: 542–7. PubMed

Cormier B, Rozenholc AT, Gotlieb W et al. Sentinel lymph node procedure in endometrial cancer: A systematic review and proposal for standardization of future research. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;138: 478–85. PubMed

Rossi EC, Jackson A, Ivanova A, Boggess JF. Detection of sentinel nodes for endometrial cancer with robotic assisted fluorescence imaging: cervical versus hysteroscopic injection. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23: 1704–11. PubMed

Baiocchi G (2017). Sentinel Node Mapping Versus Sentinel Node Mapping With Systematic Lymphadenectomy in High Risk Endometrial Cancer: a Open Label, Non-inferiority, Randomized Trial. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): . PubMed

Leblanc E; Gauthier H (2015). Randomized Study Comparing Sentinel Node (SN) Policy to Current French Initial Staging Protocols in Early Stage Endometrial Carcinomas at Intermediate and High Risk of Recurrence. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number):

Antonsen SL, Jensen LN, Loft A et al. MRI, PET/CT and ultrasound in the preoperative staging of endometrial cancer - a multicenter prospective comparative study. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;128: 300–8. PubMed

Leitao MM Jr., Kehoe S, Barakat RR et al. Accuracy of preoperative endometrial sampling diagnosis of FIGO grade 1 endometrial adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111: 244–8. PubMed

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...