Significance of number of positive lymph nodes and size as prognostic factors of recurrence and overall survival in cervical cancer patients

Objectives: Although not included in the formal staging of cervical cancer, lymph node status is a known prognostic factor that greatly impacts survival. The aim of this study was to investigate the number and size of positive lymph nodes as independent prognostic factors of disease recurrence and overall survival (OS) in cervical cancer patients undergoing definitive chemo-radiation therapy (CRT). Materials and Methods: The present authors reviewed the clinical data of eligible women with loco-regionally confined, Stages IB1 through IVA, intact cervical cancer who received definitive CRT at Northwestern Memorial Hospital between January 1997 and September 2009. All women underwent definitive CRT with combined external beam radiation and brachytherapy. Probabilities for risk of recurrence were calculated relative to clinico-pathological variables. OS rates were obtained via the Kaplan-Meier method and differences between groups were analyzed using the log-rank test. Results: The authors identified 109 women during the study period with cervical cancer Stages IB1 through IVA treated definitively with CRT who met all inclusion criteria. The incidence of positive lymph nodes in the entire patient population was 42% (46 out of 109 cases). Advanced tumor stage was significantly associated with an increase in number of metastatic nodes (p = 0.02) and lymph node size (p = 0.04). The number of positive lymph nodes at the time of diagnosis was found to significantly impact risk of recurrence (p = 0.03). The present analysis revealed that patients with only one positive lymph node had a significantly lower risk of recurrence than those with >1 nodes, 25% vs. 58% (p = 0.04). Comparatively, lymph node size had no significant influence on recurrence (p = 0.45). Conclusion: Incremental increases in metastatic lymph node number at time of diagnosis correlated with worsening loco-regional control and OS. On the contrary, lymph node size was not found to be an independent prognostic factor for recurrence or survival.

Cervical cancer; Lymph nodes; Prognostic factor; Overall survival

[1] “FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and corpus uteri,” Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet., 2014, 125, 97.

[2] Colturato L. F., Signorini Filho R.C., Fernandes R.C.M., Gebrim L.H., Oliani A.H.: “Lymph node micrometastases in initial stage cervical cancer and tumoral recurrence,” Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet., 2016, 133, 69.

[3] Cheng X., Cai S., Li Z., Tang M., Xue M., Zang R.: “The prognosis of women with stage IB1-IIB node-positive cervical carcinoma after radical surgery,” Chin. J. Clin. Oncol., 2004, 1, 342.

[4] Friedlander M., Grogan M., Friedlander M.: “Guidelines for the treatment of recurrent and metastatic cervical cancer,” Oncologist, 2002, 4, 342.

[5] Kosary C.L.: “Figo stage, histology, histologic grade, age and race as prognostic factors in determining survival for cancers of the female gynecological system: An analysis of 1973-87 SEER cases of cancers of the endometrium, cervix, ovary, vulva, and vagina,” Sem. Surg. Oncol., 1994, 10, 31.

[6] Inoue T., Morita K.: “The prognostic significance of number of positive nodes in cervical carcinoma stages IB, IIA, and IIB,” Cancer, 1990, 65, 1923.

[7] Kim H.S., Kim J.H., Chung H.H., Kim H.J., Kim Y.B., Kim J.W., et al.: “Significance of numbers of metastatic and removed lymph nodes in FIGO stage IB1 to IIA cervical cancer: Primary surgical treatment versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2011, 121, 551.

[8] Liu Y., Zhao L., Li M., Li M., Wang J., Wei L.: “The number of positive pelvic lymph nodes and multiple groups of pelvic lymph node metastasis influence prognosis in stage IA-IIB cervical squamous cell carcinoma”. Chin. Med. J. (Engl.), 2015, 128, 2084.

[9] Song S., Kim J.-Y., Kim Y.-J., Yoo H.J., Kim S.H., Kim S.-K., 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.

[10] Hosaka M., Watari H., Mitamura T., Konno Y., Odagiri T., Kato T., et al.: “Survival and prognosticators of node-positive cervical cancer patients treated with radical hysterectomy and systematic lymphadenectomy”. Int. J. Clin. Oncol., 2011, 16.

[11] Grigsby P.W., Siegel B. A., Dehdashti F.: “Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2001, 19, 3745.

[12] Kidd E.A., Siegel B.A., Dehdashti F., Rader J.S., Mutch D.G., Powell M.A., Grigsby P.W.: “Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis,” J. Clin. Oncol., 2010, 28, 2108.

[13] Hwang L., Bailey A., Lea J., Albuquerque K.: “Para-aortic nodal metastases in cervical cancer: a blind spot in the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system: current diagnosis and management,” Future Oncol., 2015, 11, 309.

[14] Berman M.L., Keys H., Creasman W., DiSaia P., Bundy B., Blessing J.: “Survival and patterns of recurrence in cervical cancer metastatic to periaortic lymph nodes: A Gynecologic Oncology Group study,” Gynecol. Oncol., 1984, 19, 8.

[15] Michel G., Morice P., Castaigne D., Leblanc M., Rey A., Duvillard P.: “Lymphatic spread in stage Ib and II cervical carcinoma: Anatomy and surgical implications”. Obstet. Gynecol., 1998, 91, 360.

[16] Takeda N., Sakuragi N., Takeda M., Okamoto K., Kuwabara M., Negishi H., et al.: “Multivariate analysis of histopathologic prognostic factors for invasive cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy and systematic retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy,” Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand., 2002, 81, 1144.

[17] Monk B.J., Cha D.S., Walker J.L., Burger R.A., Ramsinghani N.S., Manetta A.: “Extent of disease as an indication for pelvic radiation following radical hysterectomy and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection in the treatment of stage IB and IIA cervical carcinoma”. Gynecol. Oncol., 1994, 54, 4.