Dataset Information

A prospective multicenter international single-arm observational study on the oncological safety of the sentinel lymph node algorithm in stage I intermediate-risk endometrial cancer (SELECT, SEntinel Lymph node Endometrial Cancer Trial).

ABSTRACT:

Background

In the primary treatment of apparent uterine-confined endometrial carcinoma, pelvic ± para-aortic lymphadenectomy has been considered the standard of care. Although some retrospective data suggest that the sentinel lymph node algorithm without complete lymphadenectomy can be used without jeopardizing oncologic outcome, prospective data are lacking.

Primary objectives

To assess the 36 month incidence of pelvic/non-vaginal recurrence in women with pathologically confirmed stage I intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial carcinoma who have bilateral negative pelvic sentinel lymph nodes.

Study hypothesis

We hypothesize that patients with stage I, intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial carcinoma who have bilateral negative pelvic sentinel lymph nodes will demonstrate a pelvic/non-vaginal recurrence rate comparable to historical estimate of stage I, intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial carcinoma patients (estimated 2.5%).

Trial design

This prospective multicenter single-arm observational study will follow women with stage I, intermediate risk endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma who have undergone successful hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and bilateral sentinel lymph node biopsies, for recurrence. All patients will undergo lymphatic mapping using indocynanine green and will either receive no adjuvant treatment or vaginal brachytherapy only. Patients will be followed for 36 months.

Major inclusion/exclusion criteria

Patients will be enrolled in the study cohort if all the following criteria are met: (i) at time of surgery: hysterectomy with bilateral adnexectomy, and successful bilateral pelvic sentinel lymph node mapping; (ii) on final pathology: pathologic stage I, intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (grade 1 or grade 2 with ≥50% myometrial invasion, or grade 3 with <50% myometrial invasion), negative pelvic peritoneal cytology, and bilateral sentinel lymph nodes negative for malignancy; (iii) recommended adjuvant treatment: vaginal brachytherapy or no adjuvant treatment.

Primary endpoint

Incidence of pelvic/non-vaginal recurrence at 36 months.

Sample size

182 patients for study cohort ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Accrual will be completed in 2023 with results reported in 2026.

Trial registration

NCT04291612.

SUBMITTER: Grassi T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8223167 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceWhether sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) can replace lymphadenectomy for surgical staging in patients with high-grade endometrial cancer (EC) is unclear.ObjectiveTo examine the diagnostic accuracy of, performance characteristics of, and morbidity associated with SLNB using indocyanine green in patients with intermediate- and high-grade EC.Design, setting, and participantsIn this prospective, multicenter cohort study (Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy vs Lymphadenectomy for Intermediate- and High-Grade Endometrial Cancer Staging [SENTOR] study), accrual occurred from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2019, with early stoppage because of prespecified accuracy criteria. The study included patients with clinical stage I grade 2 endometrioid or high-grade EC scheduled to undergo laparoscopic or robotic hysterectomy with an intent to complete staging at 3 designated cancer centers in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ExposuresAll patients underwent SLNB followed by lymphadenectomy as the reference standard. Patients with grade 2 endometrioid EC underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLND) alone, and patients with high-grade EC underwent PLND and para-aortic lymphadenectomy (PALND).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was sensitivity of the SLNB algorithm. Secondary outcomes were additional measures of diagnostic accuracy, sentinel lymph node detection rates, and adverse events.ResultsThe study enrolled 156 patients (median age, 65.5 years; range, 40-86 years; median body mass index [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared], 27.5; range, 17.6-49.3), including 126 with high-grade EC. All patients underwent SLNB and PLND, and 101 patients (80%) with high-grade EC also underwent PALND. Sentinel lymph node detection rates were 97.4% per patient (95% CI, 93.6%-99.3%), 87.5% per hemipelvis (95% CI, 83.3%-91.0%), and 77.6% bilaterally (95% CI, 70.2%-83.8%). Of 27 patients (17%) with nodal metastases, 26 patients were correctly identified by the SLNB algorithm, yielding a sensitivity of 96% (95% CI, 81%-100%), a false-negative rate of 4% (95% CI, 0%-19%), and a negative predictive value of 99% (95% CI, 96%-100%). Only 1 patient (0.6%) was misclassified by the SLNB algorithm. Seven of 27 patients with node-positive cancer (26%) were identified outside traditional PLND boundaries or required immunohistochemistry for diagnosis.Conclusions and relevanceIn this prospective cohort study, SLNB had acceptable diagnostic accuracy for patients with high-grade EC at increased risk of nodal metastases and improved the detection of node-positive cases compared with lymphadenectomy. The findings suggest that SLNB is a viable option for the surgical staging of EC.

Project description:Background and Objectives: Pelvic lymphadenectomy has been associated with radical hysterectomy for the treatment of early Cervical Cancer (ECC) since 1905. However, some complications are related to this technique, such as lymphedema and nerve damage. In addition, its clinical role is controversial. For this reason, the sentinel lymph node (SLN) has found increasing use in clinical practice over time. Oncologic safety, however, is debated, and there is no clear evidence in the literature regarding this. Therefore, our meta-analysis aims to schematically analyze the current scientific evidence to investigate the non-inferiority of SLN versus PLND regarding oncologic outcomes. Materials and Methods: Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched the PubMed and Scopus databases in June 2022 since their early first publications. We made no restrictions on the country. We considered only studies entirely published in English. We included studies containing Disease-Free Survival (DFS), Overall Survival (OS), Recurrence Rate (RR), and site of recurrence data. We used comparative studies for meta-analysis. We registered this meta-analysis to the PROSPERO site for meta-analysis with protocol number CRD42022316650. Results: Twelve studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. The four comparative studies were enrolled in meta-analysis. Patients were analyzed concerning Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLN) and compared with Bilateral Pelvic Systematic Lymphadenectomy (PLND) in early-stage Cervical Cancer (ECC). Meta-analysis highlighted no differences in oncological safety between these two techniques, both in DFS and OS. Moreover, most of the sites of recurrences in the SLN group seemed not to be correlated with missed lymphadenectomy. Conclusions: Data in the literature do not seem to show clear oncologic inferiority of SLN over PLND. On the contrary, the higher detection rate of positive lymph nodes and the predominance of no lymph node recurrences give hope that this technique may equal PLND in oncologic terms, improving its morbidity profile.

Project description:BackgroundSentinel node biopsy (SNB) is an important step in melanoma staging and prognostication. It is commonly performed for patients with intermediate thickness melanomas, based on clinicopathological features. However, only 20-25% of patients eventually demonstrate nodal involvement. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether tissue biomarkers with links to melanoma biology, together with clinicopathological parameters, could aid in the prediction of sentinel node involvement and improve selection of patients for SNB. In addition, we examined the role of these clinical or biological markers in disease outcome.MethodsWe collected a case-control cohort of 140 intermediate thickness (Breslow 0,9-4,0mm) melanoma patients with or without SNB involvement matched for age, gender, Breslow thickness and location. From this cohort, we tested the predictive value of common clinicopathological parameters (ulceration, mitotic count and tumor regression) and FMNL-2, ezrin and BRAF V600E immunoreactivity, for sentinel node involvement and survival. We further analyzed the correlations in the superficial spreading melanoma subtype.ResultsBased on our case control analysis, of the markers, BRAF V600E status (p = 0.010) and mitotic count (p = 0.036) correlated with SNB involvement. SNB status was a strong independent prognosticator for recurrence free survival (RFS p<0.001), melanoma specific survival (MSS p = 0.000) and overall survival (OS p = 0.029). In the superficially spreading melanoma subgroup, BRAF V600E positivity indicated poorer RFS (p = 0.039) and OS (p = 0.012). By combining the Breslow thickness, mitotic count and BRAF immunohistochemistry, we identified a group of superficially spreading melanomas with an excellent survival probability independent of SNB status.ConclusionsThese results demonstrate that BRAF immunohistochemistry could serve as a useful addition to a marker panel for selecting intermediate thickness melanoma patients for SNB.