Cancers (Feb 2024)

The Role of Systematic Lymphadenectomy in Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • Rosa Montero-Macías,
  • Juan José Segura-Sampedro,
  • Pascal Rigolet,
  • Fabrice Lecuru,
  • Andrea Craus-Miguel,
  • Juan Manuel Castillo-Tuñón

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16050955
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 16, no. 5
p. 955

Abstract

Read online

Objective: To evaluate the role of systematic lymphadenectomy in low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) and determine its impact on clinical outcomes in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) terms. Methods: A comprehensive, systematic computer literature search on PubMed was performed using the following Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms: “low grade serous ovarian cancer” AND/OR “lymphadenectomy” AND/OR “staging” AND/OR “ovarian cancer” AND/OR “cytoreduction”. Separate searches were performed with MeSH terms on MEDLINE and EMBASE to extract all the relevant literature available. We included only patients with histologically confirmed LGSOC. Results: Three studies were considered in the quantitative analysis. Systematic lymphadenectomy in LGSOC failed to provide a significant OS or PFS benefit in LGSOC when compared to no lymphadenectomy in the entire (all the stages) population (for OS: HR = 1.15, 95% CI [0.42, 3.18] I2 = 84% and for PFS: HR = 1.46, 95% CI [0.63, 3.41], I2 = 71%), nor did it in the subtype analysis regarding FIGO stages. For FIGO early-stage I-II LGSOC, the DFS data were pooled (HR = 1.48, 95% CI [0.58, 3.78], I2 = 75%). In patients with advanced-stage (FIGO II–IV), we also failed to prove survival benefit for lymphadenectomy in OS (HR = 1.74, 95% CI [0.87, 3.48], I2 = 11%) or DFS (HR = 1.48, 95% CI [0.58, 3.78], I2 = 75%) compared to no lymphadenectomy. Conclusion: More extensive prospective research is mandatory to understand the real impact of lymphadenectomy on survival in LGSOC. The existing literature does not provide strong evidence.

Keywords