Risk factors for lymph node metastasis in apparent early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer: Implications for surgical staging

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Gynecologic oncology Pub Date : 2011-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.05.001
Cecelia A. Powless , Giovanni D. Aletti , Jamie N. Bakkum-Gamez, William A. Cliby
{"title":"Risk factors for lymph node metastasis in apparent early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer: Implications for surgical staging","authors":"Cecelia A. Powless ,&nbsp;Giovanni D. Aletti ,&nbsp;Jamie N. Bakkum-Gamez,&nbsp;William A. Cliby","doi":"10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.05.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p><span><span>The extent of lymphadenectomy to be performed in apparent early-stage </span>epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is not well defined. We evaluated the patterns of </span>lymphatic spread<span> in apparent early-stage EOC and risk factors for lymph node metastasis, as these have potential implications for clinical decision making.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>All cases of apparent early-stage EOC diagnosed at our institution between January 1994 and December 2003 were retrospectively identified. Apparent early-stage EOC was defined as gross disease that appeared confined to the pelvis without abdominal spread at the time of initial exploration. Demographics, pathologic findings, staging procedures performed, and clinical impression at surgery were analyzed. Patterns of lymph node positivity and risk factors associated with upstaging were assessed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p><span><span>One hundred and ninety patients with apparent early-stage EOC undergoing primary surgical staging met criteria for inclusion. All patients had at least some pathologic assessment of lymph nodes, with 115 having both bilateral pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy performed. After review of pathology and operative reports, the final </span>FIGO<span> staging within the cohort was 54 IA (28.4%), 10 IB (5.3%), 51 IC (26.8%), 1 IIA (0.5%), 4 IIB (2.1%), 37 IIC (19.5%), 8 IIIA (4.2%), 25 IIIC (13.2%). Overall 25/190 (13%) had lymph nodes metastasis as follows: 8 (32%) had positive pelvic nodes, 12 (48%) had positive paraaortic nodes, and 5 (20%) had both positive pelvic and paraaortic lymph nodes. Significant risk factors for lymph node metastasis included bilateral vs. unilateral primary lesion (26.8% vs. 7.5%, </span></span><em>p</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->0.001), positive cytologic washings vs. negative (22.4% vs. 9.1%, <em>p</em> <!-->=<!--> <span>0.012), ascites vs. no ascites (28.2% vs. 9.3%, </span><em>p</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.002), serous vs. other histology (28% vs. 9%, <em>p</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.001), grade 1 vs. grade 2 vs. grade 3 disease (2.7% vs. 1.9% vs. 23.2%, <em>p</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <span>0.001), and preoperative CA 125 levels of &gt;</span> <!-->35 vs. ≤ 35 U/ml (22.4% vs.0% <em>p</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.006). No patients with mucinous cancers (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <span>29) had lymph node metastases. Patterns of LN metastases were largely independent of laterality of primary lesions: among those with unilateral lesions and positive nodes (</span><em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <span>10), 5 (50%) had ipsilateral lymph node involvement, 4 (40%) had bilateral involvement, and 1 (10%) had isolated contralateral lymph nodes positive.</span></p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Complete surgical staging in EOC patients with gross disease confined to the ovaries and pelvis should include bilateral pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy.</p><p><span>Even in patients with unilateral lesions, lymph node metastases are commonly bilateral. Bilateral ovarian lesions, positive </span>cytology<span>, presence of ascites, high grade histology, and serous histology are risk factors for lymph node involvement. This information may be helpful in counseling patients presenting for consideration of re-staging after unexpected findings of malignancy.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":12853,"journal":{"name":"Gynecologic oncology","volume":"122 3","pages":"Pages 536-540"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2011-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.05.001","citationCount":"106","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecologic oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090825811003544","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 106

Abstract

Objectives

The extent of lymphadenectomy to be performed in apparent early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is not well defined. We evaluated the patterns of lymphatic spread in apparent early-stage EOC and risk factors for lymph node metastasis, as these have potential implications for clinical decision making.

Methods

All cases of apparent early-stage EOC diagnosed at our institution between January 1994 and December 2003 were retrospectively identified. Apparent early-stage EOC was defined as gross disease that appeared confined to the pelvis without abdominal spread at the time of initial exploration. Demographics, pathologic findings, staging procedures performed, and clinical impression at surgery were analyzed. Patterns of lymph node positivity and risk factors associated with upstaging were assessed.

Results

One hundred and ninety patients with apparent early-stage EOC undergoing primary surgical staging met criteria for inclusion. All patients had at least some pathologic assessment of lymph nodes, with 115 having both bilateral pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy performed. After review of pathology and operative reports, the final FIGO staging within the cohort was 54 IA (28.4%), 10 IB (5.3%), 51 IC (26.8%), 1 IIA (0.5%), 4 IIB (2.1%), 37 IIC (19.5%), 8 IIIA (4.2%), 25 IIIC (13.2%). Overall 25/190 (13%) had lymph nodes metastasis as follows: 8 (32%) had positive pelvic nodes, 12 (48%) had positive paraaortic nodes, and 5 (20%) had both positive pelvic and paraaortic lymph nodes. Significant risk factors for lymph node metastasis included bilateral vs. unilateral primary lesion (26.8% vs. 7.5%, p < 0.001), positive cytologic washings vs. negative (22.4% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.012), ascites vs. no ascites (28.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.002), serous vs. other histology (28% vs. 9%, p = 0.001), grade 1 vs. grade 2 vs. grade 3 disease (2.7% vs. 1.9% vs. 23.2%, p < 0.001), and preoperative CA 125 levels of > 35 vs. ≤ 35 U/ml (22.4% vs.0% p = 0.006). No patients with mucinous cancers (n = 29) had lymph node metastases. Patterns of LN metastases were largely independent of laterality of primary lesions: among those with unilateral lesions and positive nodes (n = 10), 5 (50%) had ipsilateral lymph node involvement, 4 (40%) had bilateral involvement, and 1 (10%) had isolated contralateral lymph nodes positive.

Conclusions

Complete surgical staging in EOC patients with gross disease confined to the ovaries and pelvis should include bilateral pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy.

Even in patients with unilateral lesions, lymph node metastases are commonly bilateral. Bilateral ovarian lesions, positive cytology, presence of ascites, high grade histology, and serous histology are risk factors for lymph node involvement. This information may be helpful in counseling patients presenting for consideration of re-staging after unexpected findings of malignancy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
早期上皮性卵巢癌淋巴结转移的危险因素:对手术分期的影响
目的早期上皮性卵巢癌(EOC)的淋巴结切除术范围尚不明确。我们评估了明显早期EOC的淋巴扩散模式和淋巴结转移的危险因素,因为这些因素对临床决策有潜在的影响。方法回顾性分析1994年1月至2003年12月在本院诊断的所有早期明显EOC病例。明显的早期EOC被定义为在最初探查时表现为局限于骨盆而无腹部扩散的明显疾病。分析了人口统计学、病理发现、手术分期和临床印象。评估淋巴结阳性模式和与占优相关的危险因素。结果190例明显的早期EOC患者接受初级手术分期符合入选标准。所有患者至少有一些淋巴结的病理评估,其中115例同时进行了双侧盆腔和主动脉旁淋巴结切除术。在回顾病理和手术报告后,队列中最终FIGO分期为54例IA(28.4%)、10例IB(5.3%)、51例IC(26.8%)、1例IIA(0.5%)、4例IIB(2.1%)、37例IIC(19.5%)、8例IIIA(4.2%)、25例IIIC(13.2%)。总体而言,25/190(13%)患者有淋巴结转移:8例(32%)患者盆腔淋巴结阳性,12例(48%)患者主动脉旁淋巴结阳性,5例(20%)患者盆腔和主动脉旁淋巴结均阳性。淋巴结转移的重要危险因素包括双侧与单侧原发病变(26.8% vs. 7.5%, p <0.001),细胞学冲洗阳性vs阴性(22.4% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.012),腹水vs.无腹水(28.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.002),浆液vs.其他组织学(28% vs. 9%, p = 0.001), 1级vs. 2级vs. 3级疾病(2.7% vs. 1.9% vs. 23.2%, p <0.001),术前ca125水平>35 vs.≤35 U/ml (22.4% vs.0% p = 0.006)。29例粘液癌患者均无淋巴结转移。LN转移的模式在很大程度上与原发病灶的侧边无关:在单侧病变和淋巴结阳性的患者(n = 10)中,5例(50%)为同侧淋巴结受累,4例(40%)为双侧受累,1例(10%)为孤立的对侧淋巴结阳性。结论单纯病变局限于卵巢和骨盆的EOC患者的完整手术分期应包括双侧盆腔和主动脉旁淋巴结切除术。即使在单侧病变的患者中,淋巴结转移也通常是双侧的。双侧卵巢病变、细胞学阳性、腹水存在、高分级组织学和浆液组织学是淋巴结累及的危险因素。这一信息可能有助于咨询患者提出考虑重新分期后,恶性肿瘤的意外发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Gynecologic oncology
Gynecologic oncology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
6.40%
发文量
1062
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: Gynecologic Oncology, an international journal, is devoted to the publication of clinical and investigative articles that concern tumors of the female reproductive tract. Investigations relating to the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of female cancers, as well as research from any of the disciplines related to this field of interest, are published. Research Areas Include: • Cell and molecular biology • Chemotherapy • Cytology • Endocrinology • Epidemiology • Genetics • Gynecologic surgery • Immunology • Pathology • Radiotherapy
期刊最新文献
CDO1 and CELF4 methylation assay as the dominant predictor of endometrial cancer: A cohort analysis across pre- and post-menopausal cohorts. Clinico-pathological characteristics of adult granulosa cell tumors of the ovary and the role of staging surgery: A national database study. Biomarker heterogeneity and efficacy of durvalumab plus carboplatin/paclitaxel followed by durvalumab with or without olaparib in patients with mismatch repair proficient endometrial cancer: exploratory analyses of the DUO- E/GOG-3041/ENGOT-EN10 trial. Remarkable preclinical activity of trastuzumab-deruxtecan (T-DXd) in FISH-negative, HER2 IHC 1+ and 2+ expressing primary endometrial cancer cell lines and xenografts. Survival benefit of platinum-based chemotherapy in non-surgically treated advanced ovarian cancer: A nationwide study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1