Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2021 Feb 1;156(2):157-164.
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.5060.

Assessment of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy vs Lymphadenectomy for Intermediate- and High-Grade Endometrial Cancer Staging

Maria C Cusimano  1 , Danielle Vicus  1   2 , Katherine Pulman  1   3 , Manjula Maganti  4 , Marcus Q Bernardini  1   5 , Genevieve Bouchard-Fortier  1   5 , Stephane Laframboise  1   5 , Taymaa May  1   5 , Liat F Hogen  1   5 , Allan L Covens  1   2 , Lilian T Gien  1   2 , Rachel Kupets  1   2 , Marjan Rouzbahman  6 , Blaise A Clarke  6 , Jelena Mirkovic  7 , Matthew Cesari  8 , Gulisa Turashvili  9 , Aysha Zia  1   5 , Gabrielle E V Ene  1   5 , Sarah E Ferguson  1   5
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Assessment of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy vs Lymphadenectomy for Intermediate- and High-Grade Endometrial Cancer Staging

Maria C Cusimano et al. JAMA Surg. .

Abstract

Importance: Whether sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) can replace lymphadenectomy for surgical staging in patients with high-grade endometrial cancer (EC) is unclear.

Objective: To 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 participants: In 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.

Exposures: All 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 measures: The primary outcome was sensitivity of the SLNB algorithm. Secondary outcomes were additional measures of diagnostic accuracy, sentinel lymph node detection rates, and adverse events.

Results: The 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 relevance: In 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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Clarke reported receiving personal fees from AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Flow Diagram of Included Patients
ICG indicates indocyanine green.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Anatomical Location of Sentinel Lymph Nodes (SLNs)
Figure adapted with permission from Servier Medical Art (http://www.servier.com).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. 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(2):170-199. doi:10.6004/jnccn.2018.0006 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kitchener H, Swart AM, Qian Q, Amos C, Parmar MK; ASTEC Study Group . Efficacy of systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC trial): a randomised study. Lancet. 2009;373(9658):125-136. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61766-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Benedetti Panici P, Basile S, Maneschi F, et al. . Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(23):1707-1716. doi:10.1093/jnci/djn397 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cormier B, Rozenholc AT, Gotlieb W, Plante M, Giede C; Communities of Practice (CoP) Group of Society of Gynecologic Oncology of Canada (GOC) . Sentinel lymph node procedure in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and proposal for standardization of future research. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;138(2):478-485. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.05.039 - DOI - PubMed
    1. 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(5):459-476, e410. - PubMed

Publication types