Yeungnam Univ J Med.  2019 May;36(2):115-123. 10.12701/yujm.2019.00143.

Clinical significance of lymph node size in locally advanced cervical cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy

• Oh J
• Seol KH
• Choi YS
• Lee JW
• Bae JY

• KMID: 2449324
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.12701/yujm.2019.00143

Abstract

BACKGROUND
This study aimed to assess the in-field lymph node (LN) failure rate according to LN size and to investigate effect of LN size on the survival outcome of patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT).
METHODS
A total of 310 patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma treated with CCRT were enrolled in retrospective study. LN status was evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging. All patients received conventional external beam irradiation and high-dose rate brachytherapy, and concurrent cisplatin-based chemotherapy. In-field LN failure rate according to LN size was analyzed.
RESULTS
The median follow-up period was 83 months (range, 3-201 months). In-field LN failure rate in patients with pelvic LN size more than 10 mm was significantly higher than that in patients with pelvic LN size less than 10 mm (p<0.001). A similar finding was observed in the in-field para-aortic LN (PALN) failure rate (p=0.024). The pelvic and PALN size (≥10 mm) was a significant prognostic factor of overall-survival (OS) and disease-free survival rate in univariate and multivariate analyses. The OS rate was significantly different between groups according to LN size (<10 mm vs. ≥10 mm).
CONCLUSION
A LN of less than 10 mm in size in an imaging study is controlled by CCRT. On the other hand, in LN of more than 10 mm in size, the in-field LN failure rate increase and the prognosis deteriorate. Therefore, a more aggressive treatment strategy is needed.

Keyword

Chemoradiotherapy; Lymph node; Uterine cervical neoplasms

MeSH Terms

Brachytherapy
Chemoradiotherapy*
Disease-Free Survival
Drug Therapy
Follow-Up Studies
Hand
Humans
Lymph Nodes*
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Multivariate Analysis
Prognosis
Retrospective Studies
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms*

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. Cumulative in-field pelvic LN failure rate according to LN size. LN, lymph node.

• 

  Fig. 2. Cumulative in-field PALN failure rate according to LN size in patients treated with extended-field pelvic radiotherapy plus chemotherapy. PALN, para-aortic lymph node.

• 

  Fig. 3. Overall survival difference according to pelvic LN size. LN, lymph node.

• 

  Fig. 4. Overall survival difference according to PALN size. PALN, para-aortic lymph node.

Reference

References

1. Lim MC, Lee M, Shim SH, Nam EJ, Lee JY, Kim HJ, et al. Practice guidelines for management of cervical cancer in Korea: a Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology Consensus Statement. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 28:e22.

2. Eifel PJ, Winter K, Morris M, Levenback C, Grigsby PW, Cooper J, et al. Pelvic irradiation with concurrent chemotherapy versus pelvic and para-aortic irradiation for high-risk cervical cancer: an update of radiation therapy oncology group trial (RTOG) 90-01. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22:872–80.

3. Morris M, Eifel PJ, Lu J, Grigsby PW, Levenback C, Stevens RE, et al. Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high-risk cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999; 340:1137–43.

4. Rossi PJ, Horowitz IR, Johnstone PA, Jani AB. Lymphadenectomy for patients with cervical cancer: is it of value? J Surg Oncol. 2009; 100:404–6.

5. Marana HR, de Andrade JM, Dos Reis FJ, Tiezzi DG, Zola FE, Clagnan WS, et al. Impact of surgical staging in locally advanced cervical cancer and subsequent chemotherapy. J Surg Oncol. 2009; 100:505–10.

6. Goff BA, Muntz HG, Paley PJ, Tamimi HK, Koh WJ, Greer BE. Impact of surgical staging in women with locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1999; 74:436–42.

7. Bae HS, Kim YJ, Lim MC, Seo SS, Park SY, Kang S, et al. Predictors of radiation field failure after definitive chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016; 26:737–42.

8. Pilleron JP, Durand JC, Hamelin JP. Prognostic value of node metastasis in cancer of the uterine cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1974; 119:458–62.

9. Brenner DJ. Dose, volume, and tumor-control predictions in radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993; 26:171–9.

10. Perez CA, Grigsby PW, Chao KS, Mutch DG, Lockett MA. Tumor size, irradiation dose, and long-term outcome of carcinoma of uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998; 41:307–17.

11. Tanderup K, Fokdal LU, Sturdza A, Haie-Meder C, Mazeron R, van Limbergen E, et al. Effect of tumor dose, volume and overall treatment time on local control after radiochemotherapy including MRI guided brachytherapy of locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2016; 120:441–6.

12. Hata M, Koike I, Miyagi E, Numazaki R, Asai-Sato M, Kasuya T, et al. Radiation therapy for pelvic lymph node metastasis from uterine cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2013; 131:99–102.

13. Ariga T, Toita T, Kasuya G, Nagai Y, Inamine M, Kudaka W, et al. External beam boost irradiation for clinically positive pelvic nodes in patients with uterine cervical cancer. J Radiat Res. 2013; 54:690–6.

14. Wakatsuki M, Ohno T, Kato S, Ando K, Noda SE, Kiyohara H, et al. Impact of boost irradiation on pelvic lymph node control in patients with cervical cancer. J Radiat Res. 2014; 55:139–45.

15. Song S, Kim JY, Kim YJ, Yoo HJ, Kim SH, Kim SK, et al. The size of the metastatic lymph node is an independent prognostic factor for the patients with cervical cancer treated by definitive radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2013; 108:168–73.

16. McMahon CJ, Rofsky NM, Pedrosa I. Lymphatic metastases from pelvic tumors: anatomic classification, characterization, and staging. Radiology. 2010; 254:31–46.

17. Lai G, Rockall AG. Lymph node imaging in gynecologic malignancy. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2010; 31:363–76.

18. Tsai CS, Lai CH, Chang TC, Yen TC, Ng KK, Hsueh S, et al. A prospective randomized trial to study the impact of pretreatment FDG-PET for cervical cancer patients with MRI-detected positive pelvic but negative para-aortic lymphadenopathy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010; 76:477–84.

19. Joiner MC, Bentzen SM. Fractionation: the linear-quadratic approach. In : Joiner M, van der Kogel A, editors. Basic clinical radiobiology. 4th ed. London: Hodder Arnold;2009. p. 102–19.

20. Viswanathan AN. Uterine cervix. In : Halperin EC, Wazer DE, Perez CA, Brady LW, editors. Perez and Brady’s principles and practice of radiation oncology. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins;2013. p. 1355–425.

21. Eifel PJ, Klopp AH. Gynecologic radiation oncology: a practical guide. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer;2017. p. 78–99.

22. Hacker NF, Wain GV, Nicklin JL. Resection of bulky positive lymph nodes in patients with cervical carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1995; 5:250–6.

23. Lai CH, Huang KG, Hong JH, Lee CL, Chou HH, Chang TC, et al. Randomized trial of surgical staging (extraperitoneal or laparoscopic) versus clinical staging in locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2003; 89:160–7.

24. Brockbank E, Kokka F, Bryant A, Pomel C, Reynolds K. Pre-treatment surgical para-aortic lymph node assessment in locally advanced cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; (3):CD008217.

25. Vandeperre A, Van Limbergen E, Leunen K, Moerman P, Amant F, Vergote I. et al. Para-aortic lymph node metastases in locally advanced cervical cancer: Comparison between surgical staging and imaging. Gynecol Oncol. 2015; 138:299–303.

26. Bellomi M, Bonomo G, Landoni F, Villa G, Leon ME, Bocciolone L, et al. Accuracy of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of lymph node involvement in cervix carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2005; 15:2469–74.

27. Choi HJ, Roh JW, Seo SS, Lee S, Kim JY, Kim SK, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the presurgical detection of lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma: a prospective study. Cancer. 2006; 106:914–22.

28. Gouy S, Morice P, Narducci F, Uzan C, Gilmore J, Kolesnikov-Gauthier H, et al. Nodal-staging surgery for locally advanced cervical cancer in the era of PET. Lancet Oncol. 2012; 13:e212–20.

29. Inoue T, Chihara T, Morita K. The prognostic significance of the size of the largest nodes in metastatic carcinoma from the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 1984; 19:187–93.

30. Kodama J, Seki N, Ojima Y, Nakamura K, Hongo A, Hiramatsu Y. Prognostic factors in node-positive patients with stage IB-IIB cervical cancer treated by radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006; 93:130–5.

31. Kim SH, Kim SC, Choi BI, Han MC. Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology. 1994; 190:807–11.

32. Toita T, Kitagawa R, Hamano T, Umayahara K, Hirashima Y, Aoki Y, et al. Phase II study of concurrent chemoradiotherapy with high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy in patients with locally advanced uterine cervical cancer: efficacy and toxicity of a low cumulative radiation dose schedule. Gynecol Oncol. 2012; 126:211–6.

33. Rash DL, Lee YC, Kashefi A, Durbin-Johnson B, Mathai M, Valicenti R, et al. Clinical response of pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenopathy to a radiation boost in the definitive management of locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 87:317–22.

34. Simpson DR, Song WY, Moiseenko V, Rose BS, Yashar CM, Mundt AJ, et al. Normal tissue complication probability analysis of acute gastrointestinal toxicity in cervical cancer patients undergoing intensity modulated radiation therapy and concurrent cisplatin. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 83:e81–6.

35. Verma J, Sulman EP, Jhingran A, Tucker SL, Rauch GM, Eifel PJ, et al. Dosimetric predictors of duodenal toxicity after intensity modulated radiation therapy for treatment of the para-aortic nodes in gynecologic cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014; 88:357–62.

36. Hegazy MW, Mahmood RI, Al-Badawi IA, Moftah B, AlHusaini H. Radiotherapy dose escalation with concurrent chemotherapy in locally advanced cervix cancer is feasible. Clin Transl Oncol. 2016; 18:58–64.

37. Collen C, Engels B, Duchateau M, Tournel K, De Ridder M, Bral S, et al. Volumetric imaging by megavoltage computed tomography for assessment of internal organ motion during radiotherapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010; 77:1590–5.

38. van de Bunt L, van der Heide UA, Ketelaars M, de Kort GA, Jürgenliemk-Schulz IM. Conventional, conformal, and intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment planning of external beam radiotherapy for cervical cancer: the impact of tumor regression. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 64:189–96.