Dataset Information

The extent of aortic lymphadenectomy in locally advanced cervical cancer impacts on survival.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The prognostic impact of surgical paraaortic staging remains unclear in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). The objective of our study was to evaluate the results of the surgical technique of preoperative aortic lymphadenectomy in LACC related to tumor burden and disease spread to assess its influence on survival.

Methods

Data of 1,072 patients with cervical cancer were taken from 11 Spanish hospitals (Spain-Gynecologic Oncology Group [GOG] working group). Complete aortic lymphadenectomy surgery (CALS) was considered when the lymph nodes (LNs) were excised up to the left renal vein. The extent of the disease was performed evaluating the LNs by calculating the geometric means and quantifying the log odds between positive LNs and negative LNs. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the survival distribution. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to account for the influence of multiple variables.

Results

A total of 394 patients were included. Pathological analysis revealed positive aortic LNs in 119 patients (30%). LODDS cut-off value of -2 was established as a prognostic indicator. CALS and LODDS <-2 were associated with better disease free survival and overall survival than suboptimal aortic lymphadenectomy surgery and LODDS ?-2. In a multivariate model analysis, CALS is revealed as an independent prognostic factor in LACC.

Conclusion

When performing preoperative surgical staging in LACC, it is not advisable to take simple samples from the regional nodes. Radical dissection of the aortic and pelvic regions offers a more reliable staging of the LNs and has a favorable influence on survival.

SUBMITTER: Llueca A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7767657 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The extent of aortic lymphadenectomy in locally advanced cervical cancer impacts on survival.

Llueca Antoni A Escrig Javier J Gil-Moreno Antonio A Benito Virginia V Hernández Alicia A Díaz-Feijoo Berta B

Journal of gynecologic oncology 20201026 1

<h4>Objective</h4>The prognostic impact of surgical paraaortic staging remains unclear in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). The objective of our study was to evaluate the results of the surgical technique of preoperative aortic lymphadenectomy in LACC related to tumor burden and disease spread to assess its influence on survival.<h4>Methods</h4>Data of 1,072 patients with cervical cancer were taken from 11 Spanish hospitals (Spain-Gynecologic Oncology Group [GOG] working gro ...[more]

PMID: 33185045

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite that pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy (PPaLND) is recommended as part of accurate surgical staging by International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) in endometrial cancer, the impact of para-aortic lymphadenectomy on survival remains controversial. The aim of this work is to evaluate the survival benefits or risks in endometrial cancer patients who underwent surgical staging with or without para-aortic lymphadenectomy using meta-analysis.MethodsLiterature search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for relevant articles published between January 1, 1990, and January 1, 2017, without language restriction. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); progression-free survival (PFS)/recurrence-free survival (RFS)/disease-free survival (DFS)/disease-related survival (DRS) was also analyzed. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were conducted to investigate the source of heterogeneity. Quality assessments were performed by Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). Publication bias was evaluated by using Begg and Egger tests. The hazard ratio (HR) was pooled with random-effects or fixed-effects model as appropriate.ResultsEight studies with a total of 2793 patients were included. OS was significantly longer in PPaLND group than in pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLND) group for patients with endometrial cancer [HR 0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-0.84, P < .001, I = 12.2%]. Subgroup analysis by recurrence risk explored the same association in patients at intermediate- or high-risk (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.39-0.69, P < .001, I = 41.4%), but not for low-risk patients (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.21-1.08, P = .077, I = 0). PPaLND with systematic resection of all para-aortic nodes up to renal vein also improved PFS/RFS/DFS/DRS, compared with PLND (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.37-0.72, P < .001, I = 0). No publication bias was observed among included studies.ConclusionPPaLND is associated with favorable survival outcomes in endometrial cancer patients with intermediate- or high-risk of recurrence compared with PLND, particularly with regards to OS. PPaLND with systematic resection of all para-aortic nodes up to renal vein also improve PFS compared with PLND. Further large-scale randomized clinical trials are required to validate our findings.

Project description:This study is to compare the survival outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) to those of abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). Patients with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IB2 to IIB LACC who underwent radical hysterectomy between 2001 and 2015 were identified. The disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared according to the surgical approach and were adjusted based on clinicopathologic characteristics. A total of 396 patients were included in the study, with 179 (45.2%) and 217 (54.8%) patients in the ARH and LRH groups, respectively. The LRH group showed a significantly lower amount of estimated blood loss, lower blood transfusion rate and shorter length of hospital stay. Overall, there were no significant differences in the 5-year DFS and 5-year OS between the LRH and ARH groups with the Kaplan-Meier method. However, multivariate analyses identified LRH as an independent prognostic factor for a poor DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.5; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.19 to 0.87; p = 0.02). The analysis of stage IB2 disease and the squamous subtype (61.9% and 87.9% of all participants, respectively) reached the same conclusion. When stratifying by FIGO stage, the patients with IB2 (n = 348) in the ARH group had a significantly better DFS (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05-0.42, p < 0.01) and OS (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.67, p = 0.11) than those in the LRH group in the Cox regression model. However, no differences were found in patient with stage IIA1, IIA2, or IIB in Cox regression model. When stratifying by histological types, for the patients with squamous carcinomas (n = 375), in Cox model, ARH had a significantly superior DFS compared with those who underwent LRH (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25-0.82, p = 0.01), but the OS was not statistically significant (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.27-1.20, p = 0.14). However, no differences were found in patient with adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinomas in the Cox model. Therefore, ARH was associated with a higher DFS than LRH in patients with LACC, especially in patients with stage IB2 disease or the squamous subtype.

Dataset Information

The extent of aortic lymphadenectomy in locally advanced cervical cancer impacts on survival.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The extent of aortic lymphadenectomy in locally advanced cervical cancer impacts on survival.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets