Obstet Gynecol Sci.  2022 Sep;65(5):395-405. 10.5468/ogs.22146.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in high-risk endometrial cancer: performance, outcomes, and future avenues

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Women’s Life Medical Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Abstract

Endometrial cancer is the second most common gynecological malignancy worldwide, with an overall favorable prognosis. However, a subgroup of patients has a high risk of recurrence and poor prognosis. This review summarizes recently published articles that examined sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in patients with high-risk endometrial cancer. We focused on the performance and outcomes of SLN biopsy, and examined potential methods for improving the management of this high-risk subset. Few studies have examined the long-term outcomes of SLN in patients with high-risk endometrial cancer. Thus, we reviewed recently published retrospective studies that have adopted statistical techniques, such as inverse probability weighting or propensity score matching, to examine the outcome of SLN biopsy compared to conventional lymphadenectomy. Potential avenues for future research to fine-tune decision making for this patient subgroup were also discussed.

Keyword

Endometrial cancer; Sentinel lymph node biopsy

Reference

References

1. 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.
Article
2. Burke TW, Levenback C, Tornos C, Morris M, Wharton JT, Gershenson DM. Intraabdominal lymphatic mapping to direct selective pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in women with high-risk endometrial cancer: results of a pilot study. Gynecologic Oncology. 1996; 62:169–73.
Article
3. Rossi EC, Kowalski LD, Scalici J, Cantrell L, Schuler K, Hanna RK, et al. A comparison of sentinel lymph node biopsy to lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer staging (FIRES trial): a multicentre, prospective, cohort study. Lancet Oncology. 2017; 18:384–92.
Article
4. Ballester M, Dubernard G, Lécuru F, Heitz D, Mathevet P, Marret H, et al. Detection rate and diagnostic accuracy of sentinel-node biopsy in early stage endometrial cancer: a prospective multicentre study (SENTI-ENDO). Lancet Oncology. 2011; 12:469–76.
Article
5. Geppert B, Lönnerfors C, Bollino M, Persson J. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer-feasibility, safety and lymphatic complications. Gynecol Oncol. 2018; 148:491–8.
Article
6. Bae HS, Lim MC, Lee JS, Lee Y, Nam BH, Seo SS, et al. Postoperative lower extremity edema in patients with primary endometrial cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016; 23:186–95.
Article
7. Ha HI, Chang HK, Park SJ, Lim J, Won YJ, Lim MC. The incidence and survival of cervical, ovarian, and endometrial cancer in Korea, 1999–2017: Korea Central Cancer Registry. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2021; 64:444–53.
Article
8. Kim YN, Eoh KJ, Lee JY, Nam EJ, Kim S, Kim YT, et al. Comparison of outcomes between the one-step and two-step sentinel lymph node mapping techniques in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020; 30:318–24.
Article
9. Concin N, Matias-Guiu X, Vergote I, Cibula D, Mirza MR, Marnitz S, et al. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021; 31:12–39.
Article
10. Koh WJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Bean S, Bradley K, Campos SM, Cho KR, et al. Uterine neoplasms, version 1.2018, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018; 16:170–99.
Article
11. Tschernichovsky R, Diver EJ, Schorge JO, Goodman A. The role of lymphadenectomy versus sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage endometrial cancer: a review of the literature. Am J Clin Oncol. 2016; 39:516–21.
12. Altman AD, Ferguson SE, Atenafu EG, Köbel M, McAlpine JN, Panzarella T, et al. Canadian high risk endometrial cancer (CHREC) consortium: analyzing the clinical behavior of high risk endometrial cancers. Gynecol Oncol. 2015; 139:268–74.
Article
13. Saotome K, Yamagami W, Machida H, Ebina Y, Kobayashi Y, Tabata T, et al. Impact of lymphadenectomy on the treatment of endometrial cancer using data from the JSOG cancer registry. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2021; 64:80–9.
Article
14. Geppert B, Lönnerfors C, Bollino M, Arechvo A, Persson J. A study on uterine lymphatic anatomy for standardization of pelvic sentinel lymph node detection in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 145:256–61.
Article
15. Todo Y, Takeshita S, Okamoto K, Yamashiro K, Kato H. Implications of para-aortic lymph node metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer without pelvic lymph node metastasis. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 28:e59.
Article
16. Tanaka H, Sato H, Miura H, Sato N, Fujimoto T, Konishi Y, et al. Can we omit para-aorta lymph node dissection in endometrial cancer? Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2006; 36:578–81.
Article
17. Legros M, Margueritte F, Tardieu A, Deluche E, Mbou VB, Lacorre A, et al. Para-aortic lymph node invasion in high-risk endometrial cancer: performance of 18FDG PETCT. Anticancer Res. 2019; 39:619–25.
Article
18. Touhami O, Grégoire J, Renaud MC, Sebastianelli A, Plante M. Performance of sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping in high-risk endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 147:549–53.
Article
19. Todo Y, Kato H, Kaneuchi M, Watari H, Takeda M, Sakuragi N. Survival effect of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (SEPAL study): a retrospective cohort analysis. Lancet. 2021; 375:1165–72.
Article
20. Eoh KJ, Lee YJ, Kim HS, Lee JY, Nam EJ, Kim S, et al. Two-step sentinel lymph node mapping strategy in endometrial cancer staging using fluorescent imaging: a novel sentinel lymph node tracer injection procedure. Surg Oncol. 2018; 27:514–9.
Article
21. Solima E, Martinelli F, Ditto A, MacCauro M, Carcangiu M, Mariani L, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of sentinel node in endometrial cancer by using hysteroscopic injection of radiolabeled tracer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012; 126:419–23.
Article
22. Korkmaz V, Meydanli MM, Yalçın I, Sarı ME, Sahin H, Kocaman E, et al. Comparison of three different risk-stratification models for predicting lymph node involvement in endometrioid endometrial cancer clinically confined to the uterus. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 28:e78.
Article
23. Vargas R, Rauh-Hain JA, Clemmer J, Clark RM, Goodman A, Growdon WB, et al. Tumor size, depth of invasion, and histologic grade as prognostic factors of lymph node involvement in endometrial cancer: a SEER analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2014; 133:216–220.
Article
24. Colombo N, Preti E, Landoni F, Carinelli S, Colombo A, Marini C, et al. Endometrial cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2013; 24:vi33–8.
Article
25. Barlin JN, Khoury-Collado F, Kim CH, Leitao MM Jr, Chi DS, Sonoda Y, et al. The importance of applying a sentinel lymph node mapping algorithm in endometrial cancer staging: beyond removal of blue nodes. Gynecol Oncol. 2012; 125:531–5.
Article
26. Ianieri MM, Puppo A, Novelli A, Campolo F, Staniscia T, Di Martino G, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in the treatment of endometrial cancer: why we fail? Results of a prospective multicenter study on the factors associated with failure of node mapping with indocyanine green. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2019; 84:383–9.
Article
27. Tucker K, Staley SA, Gehrig PA, Soper JT, Boggess JF, Ivanova A, et al. Defining the learning curve for successful staging with sentinel lymph node biopsy for endometrial cancer among surgeons at an academic institution. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020; 30:346–51.
Article
28. Moloney K, Janda M, Frumovitz M, Leitao M, Abu-Rustum NR, Rossi E, et al. Development of a surgical competency assessment tool for sentinel lymph node dissection by minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021; 31:647–55.
Article
29. Soliman PT, Westin SN, Dioun S, Sun CC, Euscher E, Munsell MF, et al. A prospective validation study of sentinel lymph node mapping for high-risk endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 146:234–9.
Article
30. Persson J, Salehi S, Bollino M, Lönnerfors C, Falconer H, Geppert B. Pelvic Sentinel lymph node detection in high-risk endometrial cancer (SHREC-trial)-the final step towards a paradigm shift in surgical staging. Eur J Cancer. 2019; 116:77–85.
Article
31. Cusimano MC, Vicus D, Pulman K, Maganti M, Bernardini MQ, Bouchard-Fortier G, et al. Assessment of sentinel lymph node biopsy vs lymphadenectomy for intermediate-and high-grade endometrial cancer staging. JAMA Surgery. 2021; 156:157–64.
Article
32. Marchocki Z, Cusimano MC, Clarfield L, Kim SR, Fazelzad R, Espin-Garcia O, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in high-grade endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of performance characteristics. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021; 225:367.e1–367.e39.
Article
33. Matsuo K, Klar M, Khetan VU, Violette CJ, Nusbaum DJ, Muderspach LI, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for stage II endometrial cancer: recent utilization and outcome in the United States. Gynecol Oncol. 2022; 164:46–52.
Article
34. Matsuo K, Klar M, Khetan VU, Vallejo A, Violette CJ, Tavakoli A, et al. Uptake in sentinel lymph node biopsy for endometrial cancer with T3 classification. Gynecol Oncol. 2022; 165:361–68.
Article
35. Venigalla S, Chowdhry AK, Shalowitz DI. Survival implications of staging lymphadenectomy for non-endometrioid endometrial cancers. Gynecol Oncol. 2018; 149:531–8.
Article
36. Mahdi H, Kumar S, Al-Wahab Z, Ali-Fehmi R, Munkarah AR. Prognostic impact of lymphadenectomy in uterine serous cancer. BJOG. 2013; 120:384–91.
Article
37. Guo W, Cai J, Li M, Wang H, Shen Y. Survival benefits of pelvic lymphadenectomy versus pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy in patients with endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97:e9520.
38. Basaran D, Bruce S, Aviki EM, Mueller JJ, Broach VA, Cadoo K, et al. Sentinel lymph node mapping alone compared to more extensive lymphadenectomy in patients with uterine serous carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2020; 156:70–6.
Article
39. Schiavone MB, Zivanovic O, Zhou Q, Leitao MM Jr, Levine DA, Soslow RA, et al. Survival of patients with uterine carcinosarcoma undergoing sentinel lymph node mapping. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016; 23:196–202.
Article
40. Allan V, Ramagopalan SV, Mardekian J, Jenkins A, Li X, Pan X, et al. Propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting to address confounding by indication in comparative effectiveness research of oral anticoagulants. J Comp Eff Res. 2020; 9:603–14.
Article
41. Schlappe BA, Weaver AL, McGree ME, Ducie J, Zahl Eriksson AG, Dowdy SC, et al. Multicenter study comparing oncologic outcomes after lymph node assessment via a sentinel lymph node algorithm versus comprehensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in patients with serous and clear cell endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2020; 156:62–9.
Article
42. Bogani G, Papadia A, Buda A, Casarin J, di Donato V, Gasparri ML, et al. Sentinel node mapping vs. sentinel node mapping plus back-up lymphadenectomy in high-risk endometrial cancer patients: results from a multi-institutional study. Gynecol Oncol. 2021; 161:122–9.
Article
43. Nasioudis D, Albright BB, Roy A, Ko EM, Giuntoli RL 2nd, Haggerty AF, et al. Patterns of use and outcomes of sentinel lymph node mapping for patients with high-grade endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2020; 159:732–6.
Article
44. de Boer SM, Powell Me, Mileshkin L, Katsaros D, Bessette P, Haie-Meder C, et al. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in women with high-risk endometrial cancer (PORTEC-3): patterns of recurrence and post-hoc survival analysis of a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019; 20:1273–85.
45. Baiocchi G, Andrade CEMC, Ribeiro R, Moretti-Marques R, Tsunoda AT, Alvarenga-Bezerra V, et al. Sentinel lymph node mapping versus sentinel lymph node mapping with systematic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer: an open-label, non-inferiority, randomized trial (ALICE trial). Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2022; 32:676–79.
Article
46. Guan J, Xue Y, Zang RY, Liu JH, Zhu JQ, Zheng Y, et al. Sentinel lymph node mapping versus systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy on the prognosis for patients with intermediate-high-risk endometrial cancer confined to the uterus before surgery: trial protocol for a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial (SNEC trial). J Gynecol Oncol. 2021; 32:e60.
Article
47. Mariani A, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA, Gostout BS, Jones MB, Wilson TO, et al. Prospective assessment of lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer: a paradigm shift in surgical staging. Gynecol Oncol. 2008; 109:11–8.
Article
48. Ruiz R, Gorostidi M, Jaunarena I, Cobas P, Lekuona A. Maximizing sentinel node detection in endometrial cancer with dual cervical and transcervical fundal indocyanine green injection: 5-year single-center prospective study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021; 261:59–64.
Article
49. Martinelli F, Ditto A, Signorelli M, Bogani G, Chiappa V, Lorusso D, et al. Sentinel node mapping in endometrial cancer following hysteroscopic injection of tracers: a single center evaluation over 200 cases. Gynecologic Oncology. 2017; 146:525–30.
Article
50. Ditto A, Casarin I, Pinelli C, Perrone AM, Scollo P, Martinelli F, et al. Hysteroscopic versus cervical injection for sentinel node detection in endometrial cancer: a multicenter prospective randomised controlled trial from the multicenter italian trials in Ovarian cancer (MITO) study group. Eur J Cancer. 2020; 140:1–10.
Article
51. Ferriss JS, Erickson BK, Shih IM, Fader AN. Uterine serous carcinoma: key advances and novel treatment approaches. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021; 31:1165–74.
Article
52. Paño B, Sebastià C, Ripoll E, Paredes P, Salvador R, Buñesch L, et al. Pathways of lymphatic spread in gynecologic malignancies. Radiographics. 2015; 35:916–45.
Article
53. Kommoss S, McConechy MK, Kommoss F, Leung S, Bunz A, Magrill J, et al. Final validation of the ProMisE molecular classifier for endometrial carcinoma in a large population-based case series. Ann Oncol. 2018; 29:1180–8.
Article
54. Jiang P, Huang Y, Tu Y, Li N, Kong W, Di F, et al. Combining clinicopathological parameters and molecular indicators to predict lymph node metastasis in endometrioid type endometrial adenocarcinoma. Front Oncol. 2021; 11:682925.
Article
55. León-Castillo A, de Boer SM, Powell ME, Mileshkin LR, Mackay HJ, Leary A, et al. Molecular classification of the PORTEC-3 trial for high-risk endometrial cancer: impact on prognosis and benefit from adjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2020; 38:3388–97.
Article
56. Buras AL, Mallen A, Wenham R, Montejo M. Stage IIIC endometrial cancer review: current controversies in adjuvant therapy. Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2021; 36:100754.
Article
57. Forsse D, Barbero ML, Werner HMJ, Woie K, Nordskar N, Berge Nilsen E, et al. Longitudinal effects of adjuvant chemotherapy and lymph node staging on patient-reported outcomes in endometrial cancer survivors: a prospective cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022; 226:90.e1–90.e20.
Article
58. Jumaah AS, Al-Haddad HS, McAllister KA, Yasseen AA. The clinicopathology and survival characteristics of patients with POLE proofreading mutations in endometrial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2022; 17:e0263585.
Article
59. Westin SN, Lacour RA, Urbauer DL, Luthra R, Bodurka DC, Lu KH, et al. Carcinoma of the lower uterine segment: a newly described association with lynch syndrome. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26:5965–71.
Article
60. O’Malley DM, Bariani GM, Cassier PA, Marabelle A, Hansen AR, De Jesus Acosta A, et al. Pembrolizumab in patients with microsatellite instability-high advanced endometrial cancer: results from the KEYNOTE-158 study. J Clin Oncol. 2022; 40:752–61.
Article
Full Text Links
  • OGS
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr