Mitigating disparity?: Treatment patterns, survival, and recurrence rates by race, ethnicity, and hospital site across a large urban health system.

Objective: National data have shown worse endometrial cancer (EC) outcomes among racial and ethnic minorities. We aimed to analyze EC patient outcomes within a large urban academic health system, with a focus on patterns of care and recurrence rates. Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of EC patients at three system hospitals from 1/1/07-12/31/17. Demographic and clinical factors, including time from EMB to surgery, rate of chemotherapy completion, persistent or recurrent disease, and palliative care referrals were extracted. Descriptive statistics and survival curves were generated. Analysis was done using SAS version 9.4. Results: Black patients had lower overall survival compared to all others on univariate analysis only (p < 0.0001). Hospital site was associated with OS, with the academic anchor and satellite 1 having higher rates of all-cause mortality compared to satellite 2 (HR 4.68 academic anchor, 95 % CI 1.72-12.76, HR 5.36 satellite 1, 95 % CI 1.85-15.52). Time from EMB to surgery and rates of persistent disease following primary treatment were higher in Black patients. After adjusting for stage and grade, chemotherapy completion rate was significantly associated with race. Palliative care was utilized more for Black than White patients after adjusting for stage and grade (p = 0.005). Conclusions: Racial disparities in EC are caused by a complex web of interconnected factors that ultimately lead to worse outcomes in Black women. While precision medicine has helped to close the gap, social determinants of health should be addressed, and models focusing on the complex interactions between biologic, genetic, and social factors should be utilized.

COVID-19 and Gynecologic Oncology: What Have We Learned?

OPINION STATEMENT: COVID-19 has transformed the care we provide to gynecologic oncology patients. In addition to directly impacting the diagnosis and treatment of women with gynecologic cancer, it has affected our patient's ability to undergo recommended surveillance and has made an impact on every caregiver providing care during this time. Herein we review the current literature on the impact of COVID-19 on gynecologic oncology and highlight new approaches and innovations that have resulted in gynecologic cancer care as a result of the pandemic. The impact of COVID-19 on the field of gynecologic oncology has been profound. In addition to directly impacting the diagnosis and treatment of women with cancer, it has also challenged the very ethics with which we practice medicine. The equitable distribution of resources is paramount to upholding the Hippocratic Oath which we all invoke. The COVID-19 pandemic has stripped this oath down to its very core, forcing all medical practitioners to scrutinize who gets what resources and when. As the pandemic continues to unfold, the question remains - in the setting of a strained and overburdened healthcare system, how do we maximize beneficence to one group of patients, while maintaining non-maleficence to others? As gynecologic oncologists, we are responsible for advocating for our patients to ensure that the quality of their cancer care is not compromised, while also not overutilizing resources that are sorely needed for the care of COVID-19 victims, and not making them more likely to succumb to COVID-19 by the very nature of the treatment we provide. The effects of the pandemic are far-reaching and broad, and many of these are yet to be determined. Future studies are needed to analyze how the above-utilized strategies in GYN cancer care during the pandemic will impact the long-term outcomes of our patients.

Second primary anal and oropharyngeal cancers in cervical cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Human papilloma virus infection is responsible for approximately 31,500 new cancers in the United States annually. Almost all cervical cancers are linked to human papilloma virus infection. As early identification and treatment of cervical cancer improve, the incidence of cervical cancer has decreased and survival has improved. However, survivors continue to remain at risk for other human papilloma virus-related malignancies. The purpose of this study was to assess the risk of primary anal and oropharyngeal cancers among women with a history of squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. STUDY DESIGN: A population-based cohort of 21,060 women diagnosed with cervical squamous cell carcinoma from 1973 through 2014 was identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-9 data. Standardized incidence ratios for anal and oropharyngeal cancers were calculated to estimate the risk of a second primary human papilloma virus-related malignancy based on incidence in the general population. Results were further stratified by age (20-53, 54 years old or older) and latency period (2-11, 12-59, 60-119, 120 months or longer). The number needed to screen for oropharyngeal and anal cancers was estimated using study results and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-reported incidence rates. RESULTS: Cervical squamous cell cancer survivors had a higher risk of being diagnosed with oropharyngeal cancer (standardized incidence ratio, 4.36, 95% confidence interval, 1.19-11.15) and anal cancer (standardized incidence ratio, 2.20, 95% confidence interval, 1.28-3.52). Patients diagnosed with cervical cancer between ages 20 and 53 years had an increased risk of anal cancer (standardized incidence ratio, 3.53, 95% confidence interval, 1.15-8.23). Age 54 years or older at cervical cancer diagnosis was associated with increased oropharyngeal cancer risk only (standardized incidence ratio, 5.04, 95% confidence interval, 1.37-12.91). Latency stratification was significant for increased OPC risk between 2-11 months and 12-59 months after diagnosis. At 120 months or longer, there was an increased risk of both oropharyngeal cancer (standardized incidence ratio, 7.97, 95% confidence interval, 2.17-20.42) and anal cancer (standardized incidence ratio, 2.60, 95% confidence interval, 1.34-4.54). The estimated number needed to screen for oropharyngeal cancer (number needed to screen for oropharyngeal cancer, 282) and anal cancer (number needed to screen for anal cancer, 1272) is significantly less than the number needed to screen for cervical cancer. CONCLUSION: Squamous cell cervical cancer survivors have a substantially increased risk of anal and oropharyngeal cancers. This increased risk is significant 10 or more years after the cervical cancer diagnosis. Health care providers and survivors should be aware of this increased risk. The development of effective and economical surveillance methods for anal and oropharyngeal cancers in cervical cancer survivors is urgently needed.

Second primary uterine malignancies after radiation therapy for cervical cancer.

PURPOSE: Radiation exposure has long been established as a risk factor for cancer development. The purpose of this study is to assess the risk of uterine malignancy in patients previously treated for cervical cancer with radiation therapy. METHODS: A population-based cohort of 9092 patients diagnosed with cervical cancer who did not undergo surgery and received radiation therapy between 1973 and 2008 was identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program database (SEER 9). Patients in this cohort who developed endometrial cancer after treatment of cervical cancer were identified. 55,140 patients with endometrial cancer were also identified. The distribution of the different histologic types of endometrial cancer was determined for each of these cohorts. RESULTS: 54 patients (0.6%) were diagnosed with an endometrial cancer more than 12 months after diagnosis of cervical cancer. The average latency to endometrial cancer diagnosis was 160 months, with a range of 14-374 months. The average age of cervical cancer diagnosis was 52 years and the average age at subsequent endometrial cancer diagnosis was 66 years. Only 40% of the endometrial cancers diagnosed following treatment of cervical cancer were endometrioid. The majority were clear-cell adenocarcinomas (42%), 9% were carcinosarcomas and 5.5% were leiomyosarcomas. Of the 55,140 endometrial cancer patients in the database, a vast majority were endometrioid adenocarcinomas (91%), and only 2.3% clear-cell adenocarcinoma, 2.3% carcinosarcoma and 0.5% leiomyosarcoma. The difference in histologic type distribution between these two cohorts is highly significant (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: A small proportion of women who receive radiation for cervical cancer go on to develop endometrial cancer. These are predominantly of the more aggressive histologic types when compared to primary endometrial cancers. The latency from cervical cancer diagnosis to endometrial cancer diagnosis is over a decade. In a patient who still has a uterus after receiving pelvic radiation, vaginal bleeding should be investigated.