Does Prophylactic Paraortic Lymph Node Irradiation Improve Outcomes in Women With Stage IIIC1 Endometrial Carcinoma?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of prophylactic paraortic lymph node (PALN) radiation therapy (RT) on clinical outcomes in patients with International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2018 stage IIIC1 endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multi-institutional retrospective study included patients with International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2018 stage IIIC1 EC lymph node assessment, status postsurgical staging, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and RT using various sequencing regimens. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariable and multivariable analysis were performed by Cox proportional hazard models for RFS/OS. In addition, propensity score matching was used to estimate the effect of the radiation field extent on survival outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 378 patients were included, with a median follow-up of 45.8 months. Pelvic RT was delivered to 286 patients, and 92 patients received pelvic and PALN RT. The estimated OS and RFS rates at 5 years for the entire cohort were 80% and 69%, respectively. There was no difference in the 5-year OS (77% vs 87%, P = .47) and RFS rates (67% vs 70%, P = .78) between patients treated with pelvic RT and those treated with pelvic and prophylactic PALN RT, respectively. After propensity score matching, the estimated hazard ratios (HRs) of prophylactic PALN RT versus pelvic RT were 1.50 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-3.19; P = .28) for OS and 1.24 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-2.42; P = .51) for RFS, suggesting that prophylactic PALN RT does not improve survival outcomes. Distant recurrence was the most common site of first recurrence, and the extent of RT field was not associated with the site of first recurrence (P = .79). CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic PALN RT was not significantly associated with improved survival outcomes in stage IIIC1 EC. Distant metastasis remains the most common site of failure despite routine use of systemic chemotherapy. New therapeutic approaches are necessary to optimize the outcomes for women with stage IIIC1 EC.