Risk for pelvic metastasis and role of pelvic lymphadenectomy in node-positive vulvar cancer - results from the AGO-VOP.2 QS vulva study

Simple Summary In node-positive vulvar squamous cell cancer, questions of when and how to perform pelvic lymphadenectomy (LAE) as well as the optimal extent of pelvic treatment in general have been surrounded by considerable controversy. In Germany, systematic pelvic LAE is currently recommended as a staging procedure in patients at risk for pelvic nodal involvement in order to prevent morbidity caused by pelvic radiotherapy (RT) in patients without histologically-confirmed pelvic involvement. However, the population at risk for pelvic metastases remains insufficiently described, resulting in the potential overtreatment of a considerable proportion of patients with groin-positive disease. This applies to the indication to perform surgical staging but also to adjuvant RT of the pelvis without previous pelvic staging. Our study aims to describe the risk for pelvic lymph node metastasis with regard to positive groin nodes and to clarify the indication criteria for pelvic treatment in node-positive vulvar cancer. Abstract The need for pelvic treatment in patients with node-positive vulvar cancer (VSCC) and the value of pelvic lymphadenectomy (LAE) as a staging procedure to plan adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) is controversial. In this retrospective, multicenter analysis, 306 patients with primary node-positive VSCC treated at 33 gynecologic oncology centers in Germany between 2017 and 2019 were analyzed. All patients received surgical staging of the groins; nodal status was as follows: 23.9% (73/306) pN1a, 23.5% (72/306) pN1b, 20.4% (62/306) pN2a/b, and 31.9% (97/306) pN2c/pN3. A total of 35.6% (109/306) received pelvic LAE; pelvic nodal involvement was observed in 18.5%. None of the patients with nodal status pN1a or pN1b and pelvic LAE showed pelvic nodal involvement. Taking only patients with nodal status ≥pN2a into account, the rate of pelvic involvement was 25%. In total, adjuvant RT was applied in 64.4% (197/306). Only half of the pelvic node-positive (N+) patients received adjuvant RT to the pelvis (50%, 10/20 patients); 41.9% (122/291 patients) experienced recurrent disease or died. In patients with histologically-confirmed pelvic metastases after LAE, distant recurrences were most frequently observed (7/20 recurrences). Conclusions: A relevant risk regarding pelvic nodal involvement was observed from nodal status pN2a and higher. Our data support the omission of pelvic treatment in patients with nodal status pN1a and pN1b

Angiopoietin-2 in adults with congenital heart disease and heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Chronic heart failure is an important cause for morbidity and mortality in adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD). While NT-proBNP is an established biomarker for heart failure of non-congenital origin, its application in ACHD has limitations. The angiogenic factors Angiopoietin-1 and -2 (Ang-1, Ang-2), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and soluble receptor tyrosine kinase of the Tie family (sTie2) correlate with disease severity in heart failure of non-congenital origin. Their role in ACHD has not been studied. METHODS: In 91 patients Ang-2 and NT-proBNP were measured and related to New York Heart Association class, systemic ventricular function and parameters of cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Ang-1, VEGF, and sTie2 were also measured. RESULTS: Ang-2 correlates with NYHA class and ventricular dysfunction comparable to NT-proBNP. Further, Ang-2 showed a good correlation with parameters of cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Both, Ang-2 and NT-proBNP identified patients with severely limited cardiopulmonary exercise capacity. Additionally, Ang-2 is elevated in patients with a single ventricle physiology in contrast to NT-proBNP. VEGF, Ang-1, and sTie2 were not correlated with any clinical parameter. CONCLUSION: The performance of Ang-2 as a biomarker for heart failure in ACHD is comparable to NT-proBNP. Its significant elevation in patients with single ventricle physiology indicates potential in this patient group and warrants further studies

Asymmetrical dimethylarginine--more sensitive than NT-proBNP to diagnose heart failure in adults with congenital heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic heart failure is an important cause for morbidity and mortality in adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD). While NT-proBNP is an established biomarker for heart failure of non-congenital origin, its value in ACHD has limitations. Asymmetrical dimethylarginine (ADMA) correlates with disease severity and independently predicts adverse clinical events in heart failure of non-congenital origin. Its role in ACHD has not been investigated. METHODS: In 102 patients ADMA and NT-proBNP were measured and related to NYHA class, systemic ventricular function and parameters of cardiopulmonary exercise testing. RESULTS: In contrast to NT-proBNP ADMA differentiated between NYHA classes I-III. Both, ADMA and NT-proBNP showed a good correlation with parameters of cardiopulmonary exercise testing with comparable receiver-operating characteristic curves for identifying patients with severely limited cardiopulmonary exercise capacity. CONCLUSION: ADMA seems to be a better biomarker than NT-proBNP for the assessment of NYHA class and as a good as NT-proBNP for the estimation of maximum exercise capacity in adults with congenital heart disease. Its use in clinical routine should be evaluated

Levels of biomarkers in comparison between normal, moderate and severe impairment of ventricular function.

<p>Ang-2 (A) and NT-proBNP (B) (*p<0.05, **p<0.001, ***p<0.0001).</p

Levels of biomarkers according to ventricular physiology.

<p>Ang-2 (A) and NT-proBNP (B) (*p<0.05, **p<0.001, ***p<0.0001).</p

Type of congenital heart defect grouped according to ventricular function.

<p>Data are expressed as counts (percentage); TGA = transposition of the great arteries; CCTGA = congenital corrected transposition of the great arteries; ASD = atrial septal defect; VSD = ventricular septal defect; AVSD = atrioventricular septal defect; AS = aortic valve stenosis; PS = pulmonary valve stenosis; miscellaneous: Ebstein’s anomaly, subaortic stenosis, supravalvular aortic stenosis, pulmonary atresia, Eisenmenger.</p

Levels of biomarkers in comparison between NYHA classes.

<p>Ang-2 (A) and NT-proBNP (B) (*p<0.05, **p<0.001, ***p<0.0001).</p