Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 8, 2025
Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping and Biopsy for Endometrial Cancer at Early Stage with Laparoscopy
Published on: August 19, 2021
Clinical impact of low-volume lymph node metastases in early-stage cervical cancer: A comprehensive meta-analysis
Benedetta Guani1, Katia Mahiou2, Adrien Crestani2
1Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, CHUV Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; Faculty of Medicine and Biology, UNIL Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, HFR Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland; Faculty of Medicine, University of Fribourg, 1700 Fribourg, Switzerland.
Objective:
In order to define the clinical significance of low-volume metastasis, a comprehensive meta-analysis of published data and individual data obtained from articles mentioning micrometastases (MIC) and isolated tumor cells (ITC) in cervical cancer was performed, with a follow up of at least 3 years.
Methods:
We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis, following Cochrane's review methods guide and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The primary outcome was the disease-free survival (DFS), and the secondary outcome was the overall survival (OS). The hazard ratio (HR) was taken as the measure of the association between the low-volume metastases (MIC+ITC and MIC alone) and DFS or OS; it quantified the hazard of an event in the MIC (+/- ITC) group compared to the hazard in node-negative (N0) patients. A random-effect meta-analysis model using the inverse variance method was selected for pooling. Forest plots were used to display the HRs and risk differences within individual trials and overall.
Results:
Eleven articles were finally retained for the meta-analysis. In the analysis of DFS in patients with low-volume metastasis (MIC + ITC), the HR was increased to 2.60 (1.55-4.34) in the case of low-volume metastasis vs. N0. The presence of MICs had a negative prognostic impact, with an HR of 4.10 (2.71-6.20) compared to N0. Moreover, this impact was worse than that of MIC pooled with ITCs. Concerning OS, the meta-analysis shows an HR of 5.65 (2.81-11.39) in the case of low-volume metastases vs. N0. The presence of MICs alone had a negative effect, with an HR of 6.94 (2.56-18.81).
Conclusions:
In conclusion, the presence of MIC seems to be associated with a negative impact on both the DFS and OS and should be treated as MAC.
More Related Videos
07:13Comparison of Predictive Performance of Three Lymph Node Staging Systems in Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma Based on Machine Learning Model
Published on: April 18, 2025
09:48An Orthotopic Endometrial Cancer Model with Retroperitoneal Lymphadenopathy Made From In Vivo Propagated and Cultured VX2 Cells
Published on: September 12, 2019