Purpose. To assess the value of sentinel lymph node (SLN) sampling in high risk endometrial cancer according to the ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO classification. Methods. We performed a comprehensive search on PubMed for clinical trials evaluating SLN sampling in patients with high risk endometrial cancer: stage I endometrioid, grade 3, with at least 50% myometrial invasion, regardless of lymphovascular space invasion status; or stage II; or node-negative stage III endometrioid, no residual disease; or non-endometrioid (serous or clear cell or undifferentiated carcinoma, or carcinosarcoma). All patients underwent SLN sampling followed by pelvic with or without para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Results. We included 17 original studies concerning 1322 women. Mean detection rates were 89% for unilateral and 68% for bilateral. Pooled sensitivity was 88.5% (95%CI: 81.2–93.2%), negative predictive value was 96.0% (95%CI: 93.1–97.7%), and false negative rate was 11.5% (95%CI: 6.8; 18.8%). We noted heterogeneity in SLN techniques between studies, concerning the tracer and its detection, the injection site, the number of injections, and the surgical approach. Finally, we found a correlation between the number of patients included and the SLN sampling performances. Discussion. This meta-analysis estimated the SLN sampling performances in high risk endometrial cancer patients. Data from the literature show the feasibility, the safety, the limits, and the impact on surgical de-escalation of this technique. In conclusion, our study supports the hypothesis that SLN sampling could be a valuable technique to diagnose lymph node involvement for patients with high risk endometrial cancer in replacement of conventional lymphadenectomy. Consequently, randomized clinical trials are necessary to confirm this hypothesis.

Elderly women with ovarian cancer are often undertreated due to a perception of frailty. We aimed to evaluate the management of young, elderly and very elderly patients and its impact on survival in a retrospective multicenter study of women with ovarian cancer between 2007 to 2015. We included 979 women: 615 women (62.8%) 65 years had more >IIa FIGO stage: 76% for <65 years, 84% for 65–74 years and 80% for ≥75 years (p = 0.033). Women ≥75 years had less standard procedures (40% (34/84) vs. 59% (104/177) for 65–74 years and 72% (384/530) for <65 years (p < 0.001). Only 9% (13/139) of women ≥75 years had an Aletti score >8 compared with 16% and 22% for the other groups (p < 0.001). More residual disease was found in the two older groups (30%, respectively) than the younger group (20%) (p < 0.05). Women ≥75 years had fewer neoadjuvant/adjuvant cycles than the young and elderly women: 23% ≥75 years received 65 years, FIGO III (HR = 3.702, 95%CI: 2.30–5.95) and IV (HR = 6.318, 95%CI: 3.70–10.77) (p < 0.001), residual disease (HR = 3.226, 95%CI: 2.51–4.15; p < 0.001) and lymph node metastasis (HR = 2.81, 95%CI: 1.91–4.12; p < 0.001) were associated with lower OS. Women >65 years are more likely to have incomplete surgery and more residual disease despite more advanced ovarian cancer. These elements are prognostic factors for women’s survival regardless of age. Specific trials in the elderly would produce evidence-based medicine and guidelines for ovarian cancer management in this population.

Background and objective: Elderly and/or frail women with ovarian cancer are often undertreated. The aim of the study is to compare the effects of age and frailty on surgical approaches, postoperative complications, and prognosis in elderly women with ovarian cancer. Methods: A retrospective multicenter study of women ≥70 years were treated for ovarian cancer at seven French university hospitals between 2007 and 2015. Results: Of the 1119 women treated for ovarian cancer during the study period, 147 were ≥70 years and had complete data. Of these women, 65 were aged 70–74 years, and 82 were aged ≥75 years. Overall, 77% of the younger women (49/65) received optimal treatment compared with 51% (40/82) of the older women (p = 0.018). Women ≥75 years underwent fewer bowel resections (32% vs. 67%, p < 0.001) and experienced fewer postoperative complications (22.6% vs. 38.9%, p < 0.001); 53.2% of the women in this age group were treated by primary surgery or surgery only. These women also received more chemotherapy with platinum only (15% [9/56] vs. 2% [1/57], p = 0.007) and less bevacizumab (9% [5/56] vs. 32% [18/57], p = 0.003). Patients with greater frailty (a modified Charlson Comorbidity Index [mCCI] score >3) had a five-year survival rate of 30% versus 62% for those with a score ≤3 (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Surgeons modify their approach to treating ovarian cancer in women ≥75 years probably to reduce immediate postoperative complications. The prognosis is significantly worse in patients with greater frailty. Improvements to the sequence of treatments administered, with priority given to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with greater frailty, could help increase the number of women who receive optimal treatment and improve their prognosis.

Objective Lymph nodal involvement is a prognostic factor in endometrial cancer. The added value of para-aortic lymphadenectomy compared with pelvic nodal evaluation alone remains a matter of debate in the management of patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the prognostic value of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in terms of overall survival and disease-free survival in patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer. Methods The study adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from January 2000 to April 2023. Studies on intermediate- and high-risk patients who underwent pelvic versus pelvic and para-aortic dissection were included in the analysis. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool (QUADAS-2) were used for quality assessment of the selected articles. Results Fourteen studies were identified, encompassing 9415 patients with a median age of 62 years (IQR 56.5–66.5). The majority had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I–II disease (76%) and endometrioid histology (89%). The 72% of patients who underwent only pelvic nodal evaluation and the 87% who underwent pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy received adjuvant treatment (p=0.44). Pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy was associated with a significant improvement in 5-year overall survival (RR=0.71, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.88, p<0.01), translating to a 41% reduction in the risk of overall death. However, no significant differences were observed in the 5-year risk of recurrence (RR=1.12, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.34, p=0.15). Additionally, patients undergoing pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy experienced a 26% increased risk of post-operative complications (RR=1.26, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.53, p=0.03) and prolonged operative times (MD=56.27, 95% CI 15.94 to 96.60, p<0.01). Conclusion Pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy appears to confer a prognostic benefit in patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer. Robust prospective studies are needed to further validate these findings and elucidate the precise role of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in the optimal management of these patients.