4.6 Article

Cervical cancer with ≤5 mm depth of invasion and >7 mm horizontal spread - Is lymph node assessment only required in patients with LVSI?

期刊

GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY
卷 158, 期 2, 页码 282-286

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.04.705

关键词

Uterine cervical neoplasms; Adenocarcinoma; Squamous cell carcinoma; Microinvasive; Lymph node metastasis; Survival

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. Cervical cancer with <= 5 mm depth of invasion and >7 mm horizontal spread is classified FIGO IA instead of FIGO IB in the revised staging system, as horizontal spread is no longer considered. We aimed to determine the incidence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) and, consequently, the necessity of pelvic lymph node assessment. Methods. Patients diagnosed between January 2015 and May 2019 with cervical cancer FIGO (2009) stage IB with <= 5 rnm depth of invasion and >7 mm horizontal spread, were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Associations between disease-characteristics and lymph node metastasis (LNM), and overall survival, were assessed. Results. Of 170 patients, six (3.5%) had LNM: 4/53 (7.6%) with adenocarcinoma and 2/117 (1.7%) with squamous cell carcinoma (p = .077). Four-year overall survival was 98.2%. LNM was observed more often in tumours with LVSI (4/43 patients, 9.3%) than without LVSI (2/117 patients. 1.7%) (p .045). In adenocarcinoma with 3-5 mm depth of invasion LNM rate was 10% (4/40). None of the following tumours were observed with LNM: squamous cell carcinoma without LVSI (0/74); adenocarcinoma with <3 mm depth of invasion (0/13); <3 mm depth of invasion without LVSI (0/36). Conclusions. Lymph node assessment is essential in any tumour with LVSI or in adenocarcinoma with 3-5 mm depth of invasion. It can be omitted in squamous cell carcinoma without LVSI, in adenocarcinoma with <3 mm depth of invasion and in any tumours without LVSI and with <3 mm depth of invasion. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据