Assessment of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy vs Lymphadenectomy for Intermediate- and High-Grade Endometrial Cancer Staging
Maria C. Cusimano,Danielle Vicus,Katherine Pulman,Manjula Maganti,Marcus Q. Bernardini,Genevieve Bouchard-Fortier,Stephane Laframboise,Taymaa May,Liat F. Hogen,Allan L. Covens,Lilian T. Gien,Rachel Kupets,Marjan Rouzbahman,Blaise A. Clarke,Jelena Mirkovic,Matthew Cesari,Gulisa Turashvili,Aysha Zia,Gabrielle E. V. Ene,Sarah E. Ferguson
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2020.5060
2021-02-01
JAMA Surgery
Abstract: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.
medicine, general & internal