ABSTRACT
Sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) is presently used by the majority of gynaecologic oncologists for surgical staging of endometrial cancer. SLND assimilated into routine surgical practice because it increases precision of surgical staging and may reduce morbidity compared to a full, systematic LND. Previous research focussed on the accuracy of SLND. Patient centred outcomes have never been conclusively demonstrated. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate patient centred outcomes of SLND for endometrial cancer patients. Literature published in the last five years (January 2015 to April 2020) was retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library, across five domains: (1) perioperative outcomes; (2) adjuvant treatment; (3) patient-reported outcomes (PROs); (4) lymphedema, and (5) cost. Covidence software ascertained a standardised and monitored review process. We identified 21 eligible studies. Included studies were highly heterogeneous, with widely varying outcome measures and reporting. SLND was associated with shorter operating times and lower estimated blood loss compared to systematic LND, but intra-operative and post-operative complications were not conclusively different. There was either no impact, or a trend towards less adjuvant treatment used in patients with SLND compared to systematic LND. SLND had lower prevalence rates of lymphedema compared to systematic LND, although this was shown only in three retrospective studies. Costs of surgical staging were lowest for no node sampling, followed by SLND, then LND. PROs were unable to be compared because of a lack of studies. The quality of evidence on patient-centred outcomes associated with SLND for surgical staging of endometrial cancer is poor, particularly in PROs, lymphedema and cost. The available studies were vulnerable to bias and confounding. Registration of Systematic Review: PROSPERO (CRD42020180339).
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Interval cytoreduction following neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a well-recognized treatment alternative to primary debulking surgery in the treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer where patient and/or disease factors prevent complete macroscopic disease resection to be achieved. More recently, the strain of the global COVID-19 pandemic on hospital resources has forced many units to alter the timing of interval surgery and extend the number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles. In order to support this paradigm shift and provide more accurate counseling during these unprecedented times, we investigated the survival outcomes in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer patients with the intent of maximal cytoreduction following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with respect to timing of surgery and degree of cytoreduction. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients aged 18 years and above with FIGO (2014) stage III/IV epithelial ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the intention of interval cytoreduction surgery between January 2008 and December 2017 was conducted. Overall and progression-free survival outcomes were analyzed and compared with patients who only received chemotherapy. Outcome measures were correlated with the number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles and amount of residual disease following surgery. RESULTS: Six hundred and seventy-one patients (median age 67 (range 20-91) years) were included in the study with 572 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery and 99 patients with chemotherapy only. There was no difference in the proportion of patients in whom complete cytoreduction was achieved based on number of cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (2-4 cycles: 67.7%, n=337/498); ≥5 cycles: 62.2%, n=46/74). Patients undergoing cytoreduction surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a median 5-year progression-free and overall survival of 24 and 38 months, respectively. No significant difference in overall survival between surgical groups was observed (interval cytoreduction: 41 months vs delayed cytoreduction: 43 months, p=0.52). Those who achieved complete cytoreduction to R0 (no macroscopic disease) had a significant median overall survival advantage compared with those with any macroscopic residual disease (R0: 49-51 months vs R<1: 22-39 months, p<0.001 vs R≥1: 23-26 months, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Survival outcomes do not appear to be worse for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy if cytoreduction surgery is delayed beyond three cycles. In advanced epithelial ovarian cancer patients the imperative to achieve complete surgical cytoreduction remains gold standard, irrespective of surgical timing, for best survival benefit.