A Model to Identify Candidates for Lymph Node Dissection Among Patients With High-Risk Endometrial Endometrioid Carcinoma According to Mayo Criteria

6Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: The Mayo criteria are the most widely accepted algorithm for predicting the risk of lymph node metastasis in endometrial endometrioid carcinoma (EEC). However, the clinical value of these criteria in high-risk patients is limited and inconclusive. Methods: A total of 240 patients with EEC meeting the Mayo high-risk criteria between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018 were included in our study. We retrospectively collected the laboratory reports, basic clinical information, clinicopathological and immunohistochemistry (IHC) findings, and the sequences of molecular pathological markers of these patients. A nomogram for predicting the likelihood of positive lymph node status was established based on these parameters. Results: Among the 240 patients, 17 were diagnosed with lymph node metastasis. The univariable analyses identified myometrial invasion >50%, aberrant p53 expression, microsatellite instable (MSI), and cancer antigen 125 (CA125) ≥35 U/ml as potential risk factors for lymph node metastasis. The multivariable analyses showed that aberrant p53 expression, MSI, and CA125 ≥35 U/ml were independent predictors of lymph node metastasis. The area under the curve (AUC) for the nomogram was 0.870, as compared to 0.665 for the Mayo criteria. Conclusions: Our novel prediction model effectively identifies patients at high risk for lymphatic metastasis. This model is a promising strategy for personalized surgery in patients with high risk according to the Mayo criteria.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lu, W., Chen, X., Ni, J., Li, Z., Su, T., Li, S., & Wan, X. (2022). A Model to Identify Candidates for Lymph Node Dissection Among Patients With High-Risk Endometrial Endometrioid Carcinoma According to Mayo Criteria. Frontiers in Oncology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/FONC.2022.895834

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free