RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The multicentre randomised SPARC trial evaluated the efficacy of a nurse-led sexual rehabilitation intervention on sexual functioning, distress, dilator use, and vaginal symptoms after radiotherapy for gynaecological cancers. METHODS: Eligible women were randomised to the rehabilitation intervention or care-as-usual. Four intervention sessions were scheduled over 12 months, with concurrent validated questionnaires and clinical assessments. Primary outcome was the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). A generalised-mixed-effects model compared groups over time. RESULTS: In total, 229 women were included (n = 112 intervention; n = 117 care-as-usual). No differences in FSFI total scores were found between groups at any timepoint (P = 0.37), with 12-month scores of 22.57 (intervention) versus 21.76 (care-as-usual). The intervention did not significantly improve dilator use, reduce sexual distress or vaginal symptoms compared to care-as-usual. At 12 months, both groups had minimal physician-reported vaginal stenosis; 70% of women were sexually active and reported no or mild vaginal symptoms. After radiotherapy and brachytherapy, 85% (intervention) versus 75% (care-as-usual) of participants reported dilation twice weekly. DISCUSSION: Sexual rehabilitation for women treated with combined (chemo)radiotherapy and brachytherapy improved before and during the SPARC trial, which likely contributed to comparable study groups. Best practice involves a sexual rehabilitation appointment 1 month post-radiotherapy, including patient information, with dilator guidance, preferably by a trained nurse, and follow-up during the first year after treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03611517.
RESUMEN
Major improvements in radiotherapy over the past two decades in the definitive treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer have significantly improved loco-regional control and survival, whereas little progress has been made with chemotherapy since the implementation of concomitant cisplatin 25 years ago. However, the randomized study INTERLACE (A phase III multicenter trial of weekly induction chemotherapy followed by standard chemoradiation versus standard chemoradiation alone in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer) of neoadjuvant chemotherapy presented recently, has shown significant improvement in survival with the use of six cycles of weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel. Although INTERLACE is yet to be published, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is already being advocated as the new standard, and studies are being designed with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and brachytherapy as the standard arm. It is noteworthy that INTERLACE was initiated before the improvements in radiotherapy mentioned above were broadly implemented. The survival rate in the standard arm of INTERLACE was therefore inferior to the results obtained with the latest state-of-the-art external beam radiotherapy and image guided adaptive brachytherapy (EMBRACE, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Guided Brachytherapy in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer). Moreover, patient selection impedes the comparison of INTERLACE with other studies as the patients included in INTERLACE were younger, had better performance status, and had less advanced disease than in other studies. Notably patients with involved para-aortic nodes were excluded. In this review, we discuss neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the frame of the EMBRACE studies and show how the impact of modern radiotherapy and patient selection affects the interpretation of the results of INTERLACE. This has led us to conclude that neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not needed for the majority of patients with cervical cancer treated with definitive modern radiotherapy, and may cause harm. However, it is possible that short course neoadjuvant chemotherapy may benefit a minor subgroup of patients who need to be identified. Comprehensive understanding, including cost utility analyses, are needed to draw conclusions regarding the potential benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in low and middle income countries with limited access to modern radiotherapy.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have shown that older women with endometrial cancer have a higher risk of recurrence and cancer-related death. However, it remains unclear whether older age is a causal prognostic factor, or whether other risk factors become increasingly common with age. We aimed to address this question with a unique multimethod study design using state-of-the-art statistical and causal inference techniques on datasets of three large, randomised trials. METHODS: In this multimethod analysis, data from 1801 women participating in the randomised PORTEC-1, PORTEC-2, and PORTEC-3 trials were used for statistical analyses and causal inference. The cohort included 714 patients with intermediate-risk endometrial cancer, 427 patients with high-intermediate risk endometrial cancer, and 660 patients with high-risk endometrial cancer. Associations of age with clinicopathological and molecular features were analysed using non-parametric tests. Multivariable competing risk analyses were performed to determine the independent prognostic value of age. To analyse age as a causal prognostic variable, a deep learning causal inference model called AutoCI was used. FINDINGS: Median follow-up as estimated using the reversed Kaplan-Meier method was 12·3 years (95% CI 11·9-12·6) for PORTEC-1, 10·5 years (10·2-10·7) for PORTEC-2, and 6·1 years (5·9-6·3) for PORTEC-3. Both overall recurrence and endometrial cancer-specific death significantly increased with age. Moreover, older women had a higher frequency of deep myometrial invasion, serous tumour histology, and p53-abnormal tumours. Age was an independent risk factor for both overall recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02 per year, 95% CI 1·01-1·04; p=0·0012) and endometrial cancer-specific death (HR 1·03 per year, 1·01-1·05; p=0·0012) and was identified as a significant causal variable. INTERPRETATION: This study showed that advanced age was associated with more aggressive tumour features in women with endometrial cancer, and was independently and causally related to worse oncological outcomes. Therefore, our findings suggest that older women with endometrial cancer should not be excluded from diagnostic assessments, molecular testing, and adjuvant therapy based on their age alone. FUNDING: None.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Endometriales , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias Endometriales/patología , Neoplasias Endometriales/mortalidad , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pronóstico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Factores de Riesgo , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/epidemiología , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is part of the primary treatment for early-stage cervical cancer and high-intermediate risk or high-risk endometrial cancer. Pelvic lymphocele is a postoperative complication of PLND, and when symptomatic, lymphoceles necessitate treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors of symptomatic lymphocele after robot-assisted laparoscopic PLND in cervical and endometrial cancer. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Single-center academic hospital. PATIENTS: Two hundred and fifty-eight patients with cervical cancer and 129 patients with endometrial cancer. INTERVENTIONS: Pelvic lymphadenectomy by robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The authors retrospectively included all patients with early-stage cervical cancer and high-intermediate risk or high-risk endometrial cancer who underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy by robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery between 2008 and 2022. Medical records were reviewed for the occurrence of a symptomatic lymphocele. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify risk factors for developing a symptomatic lymphocele. In total, 387 patients, 258 with cervical cancer and 129 with endometrial cancer, were included in the study. The overall incidence of symptomatic lymphoceles was 9.6% with a median follow-up of 47 months [interquartile range 23-61]. For the entire cohort, smoking was the only significant risk factor for symptomatic lymphoceles identified in univariate (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.19-5.11) and multivariate analysis (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.16-5.07). For cervical cancer, body mass index (BMI) (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00-1.17) and prior abdominal surgery (OR 2.75, 95% CI 1.22-6.17) were also identified as significant independent risk factors. For endometrial cancer, age was identified as a significant independent risk factor (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83-0.97). CONCLUSION: This single-center cohort study demonstrated an incidence of almost 10% of symptomatic lymphoceles after robot-assisted laparoscopic PLND for cervical cancer and endometrial cancer, with a higher risk observed among patients who smoke at the time of diagnosis. Furthermore, risk factors differ between the 2 populations, necessitating further studies to establish risk models.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Endometriales , Linfocele , Robótica , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino , Femenino , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Linfocele/epidemiología , Linfocele/etiología , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/cirugía , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/complicaciones , Estudios de Cohortes , Escisión del Ganglio Linfático/efectos adversos , Neoplasias Endometriales/cirugía , Neoplasias Endometriales/complicaciones , Pelvis/cirugíaRESUMEN
Universal tumor screening in endometrial carcinoma (EC) is increasingly adopted to identify individuals at risk of Lynch syndrome (LS). These cases involve mismatch repair-deficient (MMRd) EC without MLH1 promoter hypermethylation (PHM). LS is confirmed through the identification of germline MMR pathogenic variants (PV). In cases where these are not detected, emerging evidence highlights the significance of double-somatic MMR gene alterations as a sporadic cause of MMRd, alongside POLE/POLD1 exonuclease domain (EDM) PV leading to secondary MMR PV. Our understanding of the incidence of different MMRd EC origins not related to MLH1-PHM, their associations with clinicopathologic characteristics, and the prognostic implications remains limited. In a combined analysis of the PORTEC-1, -2, and -3 trials (n = 1254), 84 MMRd EC not related to MLH1-PHM were identified that successfully underwent paired tumor-normal tissue next-generation sequencing of the MMR and POLE/POLD1 genes. Among these, 37% were LS associated (LS-MMRd EC), 38% were due to double-somatic hits (DS-MMRd EC), and 25% remained unexplained. LS-MMRd EC exhibited higher rates of MSH6 (52% vs 19%) or PMS2 loss (29% vs 3%) than DS-MMRd EC, and exclusively showed MMR-deficient gland foci. DS-MMRd EC had higher rates of combined MSH2/MSH6 loss (47% vs 16%), loss of >2 MMR proteins (16% vs 3%), and somatic POLE-EDM PV (25% vs 3%) than LS-MMRd EC. Clinicopathologic characteristics, including age at tumor onset and prognosis, did not differ among the various groups. Our study validates the use of paired tumor-normal next-generation sequencing to identify definitive sporadic causes in MMRd EC unrelated to MLH1-PHM. MMR immunohistochemistry and POLE-EDM mutation status can aid in the differentiation between LS-MMRd EC and DS-MMRd EC. These findings emphasize the need for integrating tumor sequencing into LS diagnostics, along with clear interpretation guidelines, to improve clinical management. Although not impacting prognosis, confirmation of DS-MMRd EC may release patients and relatives from burdensome LS surveillance.