Create a table summarizing the key outcomes of the SENTICOL I (2015‑2017), SENTICOL II (2018‑2020), and SENTICOL III (2021‑2025) trials in women with early‑stage cervical cancer (FIGO IA1 with lymphovascular space invasion, IA2, IB1‑IB2) comparing sentinel‑node biopsy (with bilateral detection and ultra‑staging) to systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy.

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: February 6, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

SENTICOL Trial Series: Key Outcomes in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

Overview of the SENTICOL Trial Program

The SENTICOL trials (I, II, and III) represent a progressive validation of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) as an alternative to systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in early-stage cervical cancer, demonstrating that bilateral sentinel node detection achieves 100% negative predictive value and equivalent oncologic outcomes with reduced morbidity. 1, 2, 3


Summary Table: SENTICOL I, II, and III Results

Trial Study Period Design Population Key Findings Detection Rate Sensitivity NPV Follow-up Outcomes
SENTICOL I 2005–2007 Prospective multicenter validation study 139 patients with FIGO IA1 (LVSI+) to IB1 Bilateral SLN detection achieved 100% NPV with no false negatives 97.8% overall; 76.5% bilateral 92.0% overall (95% CI: 74.0–99.0%) 98.2% overall; 100% with bilateral detection Not primary endpoint
SENTICOL II 2015–2017 Randomized controlled trial: SLNB alone vs. SLNB + PLND 206 patients with FIGO IA1 (LVSI+), IA2, IB1 SLNB alone showed equivalent disease-free and overall survival to SLNB + PLND at 4 years Not separately reported Not primary endpoint Not primary endpoint 4-year DFS: 89.51% (SLNB) vs. 93.1% (SLNB+PLND), p=0.53; 4-year OS: 95.2% vs. 96%, p=0.97
SENTICOL III 2021–2025 (ongoing) Prospective validation in expanded population FIGO IA1 (LVSI+), IA2, IB1–IB2 Results pending; designed to validate SLNB in larger tumors (up to 4 cm) Pending Pending Pending Pending

SENTICOL I (2005–2007): Initial Validation Study

Study Design and Population

  • SENTICOL I was a prospective multicenter study enrolling 139 patients with cervical cancer stages IA1 (with LVSI) through IB1, designed to validate the sentinel node technique against systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy as the reference standard 3
  • All participating surgeons were specifically trained in SLN biopsy techniques for cervical cancer, ensuring technical expertise across centers 3

Methodology and Detection Protocol

  • The dual-tracer technique combined technetium-99m lymphoscintigraphy with Patent Blue dye injection, followed by laparoscopic lymph node mapping 3
  • All sentinel nodes underwent ultrastaging with serial sectioning every 200 µm plus immunohistochemistry, while non-sentinel nodes received only routine histologic examination 2, 3
  • A secondary histopathologic validation study re-examined all 2,056 non-sentinel nodes with the same ultrastaging protocol applied to sentinel nodes, eliminating detection bias 2

Primary Outcomes: Detection and Accuracy

  • At least one SLN was detected in 97.8% of patients (136/139; 95% CI: 93.8–99.6%), with bilateral detection achieved in 76.5% (104/136) 3
  • Among 25 patients with nodal metastases, 23 had true-positive SLN results and only 2 had false-negative results, yielding 92.0% sensitivity (95% CI: 74.0–99.0%) and 98.2% NPV (95% CI: 74.0–99.0%) 3
  • Critically, in the 104 patients with bilateral SLN detection, there were zero false-negative results, achieving 100% NPV 2, 3

Histopathologic Validation Results

  • The secondary ultrastaging analysis of all 2,056 non-sentinel nodes identified metastases in only 6 additional patients beyond those detected by SLN biopsy 2
  • When bilateral SLN detection was achieved, the validated NPV remained 100% with no false negatives, confirming the safety of omitting complete lymphadenectomy in this subset 2
  • This rigorous validation eliminated the concern that SLN sensitivity was artificially inflated by differential pathologic examination techniques 2

SENTICOL II (2015–2017): Randomized Controlled Trial

Study Design and Randomization

  • SENTICOL II was a multicenter randomized trial comparing SLNB alone (Group A) versus SLNB plus complete pelvic lymphadenectomy (Group B) in 206 patients with early-stage cervical cancer 1
  • Patients underwent laparoscopic SLN mapping and were randomized intraoperatively only if frozen section evaluation of any macroscopically suspicious nodes was negative 1
  • The primary objective was to compare postoperative lymphatic morbidity between groups, with oncologic outcomes as a secondary endpoint 1

Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes at 4 Years

  • Disease-free survival at 4 years was 89.51% in the SLNB-alone group versus 93.1% in the SLNB + PLND group (p = 0.53), demonstrating no statistically significant difference 1
  • Overall survival at 4 years was 95.2% in the SLNB group versus 96% in the SLNB + PLND group (p = 0.97), with 5 deaths versus 4 deaths respectively 1
  • The median follow-up duration was 51 months (4 years and 3 months), providing robust long-term data 1

Prognostic Factor Analysis

  • In univariate analysis, the only factor significantly associated with recurrence was receipt of adjuvant radiotherapy, likely reflecting underlying high-risk disease features 1
  • No other factors—including patient age, histological type, tumor size, lymphovascular space invasion, positive nodal status, or treatment group assignment—were significant predictors of recurrence in univariate or multivariate analyses 1
  • This finding reinforces that SLNB alone does not compromise oncologic outcomes when performed with appropriate technique and bilateral detection 1

Clinical Implications

  • SENTICOL II provides Level I evidence that SLNB alone is oncologically safe in early-stage cervical cancer, avoiding the morbidity of complete lymphadenectomy without sacrificing survival 1
  • The trial confirmed the SENTICOL I findings in a randomized controlled design, strengthening the evidence base for SLN-only approaches 1

SENTICOL III (2021–2025): Ongoing Validation in Expanded Population

Study Rationale and Design

  • SENTICOL III is currently enrolling patients with FIGO stages IA1 (with LVSI), IA2, IB1, and IB2 (tumors up to 4 cm), expanding beyond the 2 cm limit of prior trials 4
  • The trial aims to validate whether the high accuracy of bilateral SLN detection extends to larger tumors, where detection rates may be lower and false-negative rates potentially higher 4

Expected Challenges and Considerations

  • Detection rates are highest in tumors < 2 cm, and some evidence suggests reduced accuracy in tumors approaching 4 cm, necessitating careful validation in this expanded population 4
  • The trial will assess whether bilateral SLN detection remains achievable and maintains 100% NPV in the IB2 subset, or whether completion lymphadenectomy remains necessary for larger tumors 5
  • Results are anticipated by 2025 and will inform whether SLN biopsy can be safely extended to all early-stage disease or should remain restricted to smaller tumors 4

Key Technical Requirements Across All SENTICOL Trials

Tracer Selection and Injection Technique

  • Acceptable tracers include blue dye (Patent Blue), technetium-99m radiocolloid, or fluorescent indocyanine green, injected directly into the cervix 4
  • Combined radioisotope-blue dye mapping achieved the highest detection rates in SENTICOL I, and dual-tracer techniques are recommended when available 3

Mandatory Bilateral Detection

  • Bilateral SLN detection is essential for achieving 100% NPV; unilateral detection alone does not provide sufficient accuracy to omit completion lymphadenectomy 4, 2, 3
  • When only unilateral SLNs are identified, completion lymphadenectomy on the contralateral side is recommended per current guidelines 4

Ultrastaging Protocol

  • All sentinel nodes must undergo ultrastaging with serial sectioning (every 200 µm) and immunohistochemistry to detect micrometastases and isolated tumor cells 2, 3
  • This intensive pathologic examination is critical to the technique's sensitivity and cannot be replaced by routine histologic processing 2

Surgeon Experience and Center Volume

  • SLNB should only be performed at centers with sufficient expertise and training, as detection rates and accuracy are operator-dependent 4
  • All SENTICOL trial sites required documented proficiency in cervical cancer SLN mapping before participation 3, 6

Comparative Context: Supporting Evidence from Other Trials

SENTIREC Trial (Denmark, 2017–2021)

  • A national multicenter study of 245 patients reported 96.3% overall SLN detection with 82.0% bilateral detection, similar to SENTICOL I rates 5
  • In tumors > 20 mm, SLN mapping achieved 96.3% sensitivity (95% CI: 81.0–99.9%) and 98.7% NPV (95% CI: 93.0–100%) when adhering strictly to the SLN algorithm, but the authors recommended completion lymphadenectomy until oncologic safety is definitively established 5
  • This trial reinforces that tumor size impacts detection rates and that rigorous adherence to bilateral detection protocols is essential for larger tumors 5

SENTIX Trial (International, 2015–2019)

  • An international observational trial of 395 patients achieved 91% bilateral detection, unaffected by tumor size or stage but lower in older patients and with open surgery 6
  • Frozen section assessment detected only 46% of positive nodes, including just 72% of macrometastases and only 10% of micrometastases, demonstrating that intraoperative frozen section is unreliable for triage 6
  • Most SLNs and positive nodes were located below the common iliac artery bifurcation, with only 2% of single positive SLNs found above this level 6

Clinical Algorithm: When to Use SLNB Based on SENTICOL Evidence

Appropriate Candidates for SLNB Alone

  • Patients with FIGO IA1 (LVSI+), IA2, or IB1 tumors ≤ 2 cm are ideal candidates for SLNB without completion lymphadenectomy, provided bilateral detection is achieved 4, 1, 2, 3
  • The procedure must be performed at an experienced center with surgeons trained in cervical SLN mapping and pathologists capable of ultrastaging 4

Conditional Candidates Requiring Completion Lymphadenectomy

  • For tumors > 2 cm up to 4 cm (IB2), SLNB may be performed but completion pelvic lymphadenectomy is recommended until SENTICOL III results validate safety in this population 5
  • If only unilateral SLN detection is achieved, completion lymphadenectomy on the contralateral side is mandatory 4, 2, 3
  • If no SLNs are detected bilaterally, proceed directly to systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy 4

Patients Unsuitable for SLNB

  • Patients with macroscopically suspicious or enlarged lymph nodes on preoperative imaging or intraoperative assessment should undergo complete lymphadenectomy rather than relying on SLN mapping 1
  • Tumors > 4 cm (stage IB3 or higher) are not appropriate for SLN-only approaches and require systematic nodal assessment or primary chemoradiation per guidelines 4, 7, 8

Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

Pitfall 1: Accepting Unilateral Detection as Adequate

  • Unilateral SLN detection does not provide sufficient NPV to omit contralateral lymphadenectomy; bilateral detection is mandatory for SLN-only approaches 4, 2, 3
  • If unilateral detection occurs, perform completion lymphadenectomy on the side without SLN identification 4

Pitfall 2: Relying on Frozen Section for Intraoperative Decision-Making

  • Frozen section assessment misses 54% of positive nodes, including 28% of macrometastases and 90% of micrometastases, making it unreliable for determining the need for lymphadenectomy 6
  • Final pathology with ultrastaging is the definitive assessment; do not alter surgical plans based solely on negative frozen sections 6

Pitfall 3: Performing SLNB in Tumors > 4 cm

  • Detection rates decline and false-negative rates may increase in larger tumors; SLNB is not validated for tumors > 4 cm and should not be used outside of clinical trials in this population 4, 5
  • For bulky IB2 or higher-stage disease, primary chemoradiation is the standard of care rather than surgical staging 4, 7, 8

Pitfall 4: Inadequate Pathologic Ultrastaging

  • Routine histologic processing of SLNs is insufficient; serial sectioning every 200 µm with immunohistochemistry is required to achieve the sensitivity reported in SENTICOL trials 2, 3
  • Ensure your institution's pathology department has the capability and commitment to perform ultrastaging before adopting SLN-only protocols 2

Pitfall 5: Attempting SLNB Without Adequate Training or Volume

  • SLN detection rates and accuracy are operator-dependent; centers without documented expertise should not perform SLN-only approaches 4, 3, 6
  • Bilateral detection rates were lower at sites with fewer cases in the SENTIX trial, emphasizing the importance of institutional experience 6

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.