Oncologic impact of micrometastases or isolated tumor cells in sentinel lymph nodes of patients with endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Purpose

There is a gap in knowledge regarding the impact of micrometastases (MIC) and isolated tumor cells (ITCs) found in the sentinel lymph nodes of patients with endometrial cancer. Here, we present a meta-analysis of the published literature on the rate of MIC and ITCs after lymphatic mapping and determine trends in postoperative management.

Methods

Literature search of Medline and PubMed was done using the terms: micrometastases, isolated tumor cells, endometrial cancer, and sentinel lymph node. Inclusion criteria were: English-language manuscripts, retrospectives, or prospective studies published between January 1999 and June 2019. We removed manuscripts on sentinel node mapping that did not specify information on micrometastases or isolated tumor cells, non-English-language articles, no data about oncologic outcomes, and articles limited to ten cases or less.

Results

A total of 45 manuscripts were reviewed, and 8 studies met inclusion criteria. We found that the total number of patients with MIC/ITCs was 286 (187 and 99, respectively). The 72% of patients detected with MIC/ITCs in sentinel nodes received adjuvant therapies. The MIC/ITCs group has a higher relative risk of recurrence of 1.34 (1.07, 1.67) than the negative group, even if the adjuvant therapy was given.

Conclusion

We noted that there is an increased relative risk of recurrence in patients with low-volume metastases, even after receiving adjuvant therapy. Whether adjuvant therapy is indicated remains a topic of debate because there are other uterine factors implicated in the prognosis. Multi-institutional tumor registries may help shed light on this important question.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

References

  1. 1.

    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(1):7–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Frumovitz M, Slomovitz BM, Singh DK, Broaddus RR, Abrams J, et al. Frozen section analyses as predictors of lymphatic spread in patients with early-stage uterine cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199(3):388–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Abu-Rustum NR. Update on sentinel node mapping in uterine cancer: 10-year experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40(2):327–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    de Mascarel I, Bonichon F, Coindre JM, Trojani M. Prognostic significance of breast cancer axillary lymph node micrometastases assessed by two special techniques: reevaluation with longer follow-up. Br J Cancer. 1992;66(3):523–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    McGuckin MA, Cummings MC, Walsh MD, Hohn BG, Bennett IC, et al. Occult axillary node metastases in breast cancer: their detection and prognostic significance. Br J Cancer. 1996;73(1):88–95.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Narayansingh GV, Miller ID, Sharma M, Welch CJ, Sharp L, et al. The prognostic significance of micrometastases in node negative squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva. Br J Cancer. 2005;92(2):222–4.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Hakim AA, Terada KY. Sentinel node dissection in vulvar cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2006;7(2):85–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Knopp S, Holm R, Trope C, Nesland JM. Occult lymph node metastases in early stage vulvar carcinoma patients. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;99:383–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Maehara Y, Oshiro T, Endo K, Baba H, Oda S, et al. Clinical significance of occult micrometastases lymph nodes from patients with early gastric cancer who died of recurrence. Surgery. 1996;119(4):397–402.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Izbicki JR, Hosch SB, Pichlmeier U, Rehders A, Busch C, et al. Prognostic value of immunohistochemically identifiable tumor cells in lymph nodes of patients with completely resected esophageal cancer. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(17):1188–94.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Greenson JK, Isenhart CE, Rice R, Mojzisik C, Houchens D, et al. Identification of occult micrometastases in pericolic lymph nodes of Duke’s B colorectal cancer patients using monoclonal antibodies against cytokeratin and CC49 Correlation with long-term survival. Cancer. 1994;73(3):563–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Liefers GJ, Cleton-Jansen AM, Van de Velde CJ, Hermans J, van Krieken JH, et al. Micrometastases and survival in stage II colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 1998;339(4):223–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Edelstein RA, Zietman AL, de las Morenas A, Krane RJ, Babayan RK, et al. Implications of prostate micrometastases in pelvic lymph nodes: an archival tissue study. Urology 1996;47(3):370–5.

  14. 14.

    Juretzka MM, Jensen KC, Longacre TA, Teng NN, Husain A. Detection of pelvic lymph node micrometastasis in stage IA2–IB2 cervical cancer by immunohistochemical analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2004;93:107–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Barranger E, Cortez A, Commo F, Marpeau O, Uzan S, et al. Histopathological validation of the sentinel node concept in cervical cancer. Ann Oncol. 2004;15(6):870–4.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Cibula D, Zikan M, Slama J, Fischerova D, Kocian R, et al. Risk of micrometastases in non-sentinel pelvic lymph nodes in cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;143:7–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Fishman A, Klein A, Zemer R, Sc M, Zimlichman S, Bernheim J, et al. Detection of micrometastasis by cytokeratin-20 (reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) in lymph nodes of patients with endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;404:399–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Bosquet JG, Keeney GL, Mariani A, Webb MJ, Cliby WA. Cytokeratin staining of resected lymph nodes may improve the sensitivity of surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;91(3):518–25.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Kim CH, Khoury-Collado F, Barber EL, Soslow RA, Makker V, et al. Sentinel lymph node mapping with pathologic ultrastaging: a valuable tool for assessing nodal metastasis in low grade endometrial cancer with superficial myoinvasion. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;131(3):714–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Kim CH, Soslow RA, Park KJ, Barber EL, Khoury-Collado F, et al. Pathologic ultrastaging improves micrometastasis detection in sentinel lymph nodes during endometrial cancer staging. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23(5):964–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Erlanki S, Bolat F, Seydaoglu G. Detection and importance of micrometastases in histologically negative lymph nodes in endometrial carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2011;32(6):619–25.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    St Clair CM, Eriksson AG, Ducie JA, Jewell EL, Alektiar KM, et al. Low-volume lymph node metastasis discovered during sentinel lymph node mapping for endometrial carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(5):1653–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Todo Y, Kato H, Okamoto K, Minobe S, Yamashiro K, et al. Isolated tumor cells and micrometastases in regional lymph nodes in FIGO stage I to II endometrial cancer. J Gynecol Oncol. 2016;27(1):1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Plante M, Stanleigh J, Renaud M-C, Sebastianelli A, Grondin K, et al. Isolated tumor cells identified by sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial cancer: does adjuvant treatment matter? Gynecol Oncol. 2017;146:240–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    BackesFJ, Felix AS, Grégoire J, Plante M, Sullivane SA, et al. Sentinel lymph node (SLN) isolated tumor cells (ITCs) in otherwise stage I/II endometrioid endometrial cancer: To treat or not to treat? Abstracts presented for the 43rd annual meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology. SGO 2018.

  26. 26.

    Ignatov A, Lebius C, Ignatov T, Ivros S, Knueppel R, et al. Lymph node micrometastases and outcome of endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;154(3):475–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Piedimonte S, Richer L, Souhami L, Arseneau J, Fu L, et al. Clinical significance of isolated tumor cells and micrometastasis in low-grade, stage I endometrial cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2018;118(7):1194–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Clinton LK, Kondo J, Carney ME, Tauchi-Nishi P, Terada K, et al. Low-volume lymph node metastases in endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2017;27(6):1165–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

NRGH and PTR contributed to conception and design of study. NRGH, BN, and NC collected the data. SPH and NRGH performed data analysis and interpretation. SPH performed statistical analysis. NRGH, PTR, JLSI, SC, SF, APB, and AGM prepared the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. R. Gómez-Hidalgo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

The present study was approved by the local ethical committee.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gómez-Hidalgo, N.R., Ramirez, P.T., Ngo, B. et al. Oncologic impact of micrometastases or isolated tumor cells in sentinel lymph nodes of patients with endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Transl Oncol 22, 1272–1279 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-019-02249-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Micrometastases
  • Isolated tumor cells
  • Endometrial cancer
  • Sentinel lymph node