Correlating the KELIM (CA125 elimination rate constant K) score and the chemo-response score as predictors of chemosensitivity in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to assess the correlation between the pre-operative CA125 Elimination rate constant K(KELIM) score and the intraoperative chemo-response score (CRS) in patients with advanced high grade serous ovarian cancer(HGSC) treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy(NACT). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with Stage III-IV HGSC treated with NACT from March 2010 to December 2019 at Princess Margaret Cancer Center, Toronto, Canada. KELIM scores were calculated based on the tool devised by You et al. available online. CRS was assessed using an established 3-tier scoring system. An association analysis was performed to determine if the KELIM score assessed during NACT can predict CRS score at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery(ICS). RESULTS: 172 patients were included in this analysis. Patients with CRS 1-2 had a lower median Platinum Free Interval(PFI) (9.24 vs 13.64 months, p = 0.005), lower median progression free survival(PFS) (14.99 vs 20.29 months, p = 0.003) and lower 5-year overall survival(OS) (63.8% vs 69.7%, p = 0.54) compared to patients with CRS3. Among patients with CRS 1-2(n = 115), 68.7% had KELIM <1, while 56.2% of patients with CRS3 had KELIM ≥1(56.2%), p = 0.0017, suggesting a correlation between the KELIM and CRS scores. Furthermore, patients with KELIM ≥1 and CRS3 had significantly higher PFS compared to other groups(median PFS 28.27 months vs 17.66 months for KELIM ≥1/CRS 1/2; 17.13 months for KELIM <1/CRS 3; and 14.53 months for KELIM <1/CRS 1-2, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The biochemical KELIM score correlated with the surgical pathologic CRS score and may predict pathological response to chemotherapy. This information can be utilized to tailor and personalize treatment in patients with advanced ovarian malignancy.

Defining the Longitudinal Risk of CIN 3+ for

OBJECTIVE: To determine the baseline and cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)3 and invasive cervical cancer in participants referred to colposcopy with high-grade cytology and

Combined Interval Cytoreductive Surgery and Carboplatin-Based Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Advanced Primary High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer.

Combining interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) improves survival in advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC). Although limited, growing evidence regarding carboplatin-based HIPEC highlights its potential. This retrospective study included all patients with advanced primary high-grade serous ovarian cancer who underwent interval CRS combined with carboplatin-based HIPEC at our Canadian tertiary care center between 2014 and 2020. We identified 40 patients with a median age of 61 years. The median peritoneal cancer index was 13 and complete cytoreduction was achieved in 38 patients (95%). Median hospital stay was 13 days and there were four admissions to the intensive care unit (10%) and six readmissions (15%). Severe adverse events occurred in eight patients (20%) and there was no perioperative death. Recurrence was seen in 33 patients (82%) with a median DFS of 18.0 months and a median overall survival of 36.4 months. Multivariate analyses showed that age, peritoneal cancer index, completeness of cytoreduction, occurrence of severe complications, and bowel resection did not significantly impact DFS or OS in our cohort. Interval CRS combined with carboplatin-based HIPEC for advanced primary EOC is associated with acceptable morbidity and oncological outcomes. Larger studies are required to determine the long-term outcomes.

Evaluating the use of machine learning in endometrial cancer: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the literature on machine learning in endometrial cancer, report the most commonly used algorithms, and compare performance with traditional prediction models. METHODS: This is a systematic review of the literature from January 1985 to March 2021 on the use of machine learning in endometrial cancer. An extensive search of electronic databases was conducted. Four independent reviewers screened studies initially by title then full text. Quality was assessed using the MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies) criteria. P values were derived using the Pearson's Χ2 test in JMP 15.0. RESULTS: Among 4295 articles screened, 30 studies on machine learning in endometrial cancer were included. The most frequent applications were in patient datasets (33.3%, n=10), pre-operative diagnostics (30%, n=9), genomics (23.3%, n=7), and serum biomarkers (13.3%, n=4). The most commonly used models were neural networks (n=10, 33.3%) and support vector machine (n=6, 20%).The number of publications on machine learning in endometrial cancer increased from 1 in 2010 to 29 in 2021.Eight studies compared machine learning with traditional statistics. Among patient dataset studies, two machine learning models (20%) performed similarly to logistic regression (accuracy: 0.85 vs 0.82, p=0.16). Machine learning algorithms performed similarly to detect endometrial cancer based on MRI (accuracy: 0.87 vs 0.82, p=0.24) while outperforming traditional methods in predicting extra-uterine disease in one serum biomarker study (accuracy: 0.81 vs 0.61). For survival outcomes, one study compared machine learning with Kaplan-Meier and reported no difference in concordance index (83.8% vs 83.1%). CONCLUSION: Although machine learning is an innovative and emerging technology, performance is similar to that of traditional regression models in endometrial cancer. More studies are needed to assess its role in endometrial cancer. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021269565.

Surgical margin status in relation to surgical approach in the management of early-stage cervical Cancer: A Canadian cervical Cancer collaborative (4C) study.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical margin status in women undergoing surgery for early-stage cervical cancer is an important prognostic factor. We sought to determine whether close (<3 mm) and positive surgical margins are associated with surgical approach and survival. METHODS: This is a national retrospective cohort study of cervical cancer patients treated with radical hysterectomy. Patients with stage IA1/LVSI-Ib2(FIGO 2018) with lesions up to 4 cm at 11 Canadian institutions from 2007 to 2019 were included. Surgical approach included robotic/laparoscopic (LRH), abdominal (ARH) or combined laparoscopic-assisted vaginal/vaginal (LVRH) radical hysterectomy. Recurrence free survival(RFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Chi-square and log-rank tests were used to compare groups. RESULTS: 956 patients met inclusion criteria. Surgical margins were as follows: negative (87.0%), positive (0.4%) or close <3 mm (6.8%), missing (5.8%). Most patients had squamous histology (46.9%); 34.6% had adenocarcinomas and 11.3% adenosquamous. Most were stage IB (75.1%) and 24.9% were IA. Mode of surgery included: LRH(51.8%), ARH (39.2%), LVRH (8.9%). Predictive factors for close/positive margins included stage, tumour diameter, vaginal involvement and parametrial extension. Surgical approach was not associated with margin status (p = 0.27). Close/positive margins were associated with a higher risk of death on univariate analysis (HR = non calculable for positive and HR = 1.83 for close margins, p = 0.017), but not significant for OS when adjusted for stage, histology, surgical approach and adjuvant treatment. There were 7 recurrences in patients with close margins (10.3%, p = 0.25). 71.5% with positive/close margins received adjuvant treatment. In addition, MIS was associated with a higher risk of death (OR = 2.39, p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: Surgical approach was not associated to close or positive margins. Close surgical margins were associated with a higher risk of death. MIS was associated with worse survival, suggesting that margin status may not be the driver of worse survival in these cases.

Validation of the Integrated Prediction Model algorithm for outcome of cytoreduction in advanced ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: We previously developed the Integrated Prediction Model using a 4-step algorithm of unresectable stage IVB, patient factors, surgical resectability, and surgical complexity to predict outcome of <1 cm cytoreduction in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, and triaged patients to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary cytoreductive surgery. OBJECTIVE: To validate the Integrated Prediction Model on a retrospective cohort of patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 107 patients with advanced ovarian cancer treated between January 2017 and September 2018 was carried out. The above mentioned 4-step algorithm determined cut-off points using the Youden Index. This validation study reports sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive value on an external cohort. RESULTS: Among 107 patients, 61 had primary surgery and 46 had neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Compared with primary surgery, patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were significantly older (63.5 vs 61, p=0.037), more likely to have stage IV disease (52% vs 18%, p<0.001), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score >1 (30% vs 11%, 0.045), lower pre-operative albumin (37 vs 40, p<0.001), and higher CA-125 (970 vs 227.5, p<0.001). They also had higher patient factors (2 vs 0, p=0.013), surgical resectability (4 vs 1, p<0.001), and anticipated surgical complexity (8 vs 5, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in outcome of cytoreduction (<1 cm residual disease: 85% for primary surgery vs 87% interval surgery, p=0.12)In this validation cohort, triaging patients with patient factors ≤2, surgical resectability score ≤5, and surgical complexity score ≤9 to primary surgery had a sensitivity of 91% for optimal cytoreduction <1 cm and a specificity of 81%. The positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 83%, 90%, and 86%, respectively. Application of the Integrated Prediction Model would have prevented five patients from receiving suboptimal cytoreduction and triaged them to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: We validated the proposal that a triage algorithm integrating patient factors, surgical complexity, and surgical resectability in advanced ovarian cancer had high sensitivity and specificity to predict optimal cytoreduction <1 cm.

Oncologic Outcomes of Surgically Treated Cervical Cancer with No Residual Disease on Hysterectomy Specimen: A 4C (Canadian Cervical Cancer Collaborative) Working Group Study.

Minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of macroscopic cervical cancer leads to worse oncologic outcomes than with open surgery. Preoperative conization may mitigate the risk of surgical approach. Our objective was to describe the oncologic outcomes in cases of cervical cancer initially treated with conization, and subsequently found to have no residual cervical cancer after hysterectomy performed via open and minimally invasive approaches. This was a retrospective cohort study of surgically treated cervical cancer at 11 Canadian institutions from 2007 to 2017. Cases initially treated with cervical conization and subsequent hysterectomy, with no residual disease on hysterectomy specimen were included. They were subdivided according to minimally invasive (laparoscopic/robotic (MIS) or laparoscopically assisted vaginal/vaginal hysterectomy (LVH)), or abdominal (AH). Recurrence free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Chi-square and log-rank tests were used to compare between cohorts. Within the total cohort, 238/1696 (14%) had no residual disease on hysterectomy specimen (122 MIS, 103 AH, and 13 VLH). The majority of cases in the cohort were FIGO 2018 stage IB1 (43.7%) and underwent a radical hysterectomy (81.9%). There was no statistical difference between stage, histology, and radical vs simple hysterectomy between the abdominal and minimally invasive groups. There were no significant differences in RFS (5-year: MIS/LVH 97.7%, AH 95.8%, p = 0.23) or OS (5-year: MIS/VLH 98.9%, AH 97.4%, p = 0.10), although event-rates were low. There were only two recurrences. In this large study including only patients with no residual cervical cancer on hysterectomy specimen, no significant differences in survival were seen by surgical approach. This may be due to the small number of events or due to no actual difference between the groups. Further studies are warranted.

Using a machine learning algorithm to predict outcome of primary cytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a machine learning (ML) algorithm to predict outcome of primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with AOC undergoing PCS between January 2017 and February 2021. Using radiologic criteria, patient factors (age, CA-125, performance status, BRCA) and surgical complexity scores, we trained a random forest model to predict the dichotomous outcome of optimal cytoreduction (<1 cm) and no gross residual (RD = 0 mm) using JMP-Pro 15 (SAS). This model is available at https://ipm-ml.ccm.sickkids.ca. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-one patients underwent PCS and randomly assigned to train (n = 92), validate (n = 30), or test (n = 29) the model. The median age was 58 (27-83). Patients with suboptimal cytoreduction were more likely to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 3-4 (11% vs. 0.75%, p = 0.004), lower albumin (38 vs. 41, p = 0.02), and higher CA125 (1126 vs. 388, p = 0.012) than patients with optimal cytoreduction (n = 133). There were no significant differences in age, histology, stage, or BRCA status between groups. The bootstrap random forest model had AUCs of 99.8% (training), 89.6%(validation), and 89.0% (test). The top five contributors were CA125, albumin, diaphragmatic disease, age, and ascites. For RD = 0 mm, the AUCs were 94.4%, 52%, and 84%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our ML algorithm demonstrated high accuracy in predicting optimal cytoreduction in patients with AOC selected for PCS and may assist decision-making.

Integrated prediction model of patient factors, resectability scores and surgical complexity to predict cytoreductive outcome and guide treatment plan in advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To report performance of an integrated predictive model (IPM) algorithm based on patient factors, surgical resectability and surgical complexity to predict outcome of primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS) and guide treatment plan in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC). METHODS: Patients with AEOC between October 2018 and October 2020 were enrolled into a dedicated AEOC program and decision for PCS or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) was based on multidisciplinary consensus. Data of unresectable stage IVb, patient factors (PF), surgical resectability scores (SRS) and surgical complexity scores (SCS) was prospectively documented. An integrated prediction model (IPM) was developed to predict outcome of optimal (RD < 1 cm) cytoreduction. Retrospective analysis was performed to assess the performance of the IPM. Cut-offs were selected using the Youden Index. RESULTS: Of 185 eligible patients, 81 underwent PCS and 104 were treated with NACT. Patients undergoing PCS had significantly lower median PF (0 vs 2, p < 0.01), SRS (2 vs 4, p < 0.01) and pre-operative SCS (6 vs 8.5, p = 0.01) compared to NACT. In patients undergoing PCS, 88% had optimal cytoreduction and 34.5% had grade 3-4 post-operative complications. A model triaging patients with unresectable Stage IVb, PF > 2, SRS > 5 and SCS > 9 to NACT had 85% sensitivity, 75% specificity and 85% accuracy for outcome of optimal cytoreduction. Our model would have improved triage of 3/10 sub-optimally cytoreduced patients to NACT. For outcome of no-gross residual disease (RD = 0 mm) using the same cut-offs sensitivity and specificity were 85% and 76% respectively. CONCLUSION: The 4-step IPM algorithm had high sensitivity and specificity for optimal cytoreduction with acceptable morbidity without delay to adjuvant therapy. This algorithm may be used to triage patients to PCS or NACT once it is further validated.

Predicting recurrence and recurrence-free survival in high-grade endometrial cancer using machine learning.

OBJECTIVE: To develop machine-learning models to predict recurrence and time-to-recurrence in high-grade endometrial cancer (HGEC) following surgery and tailored adjuvant treatment. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected across eight Canadian centers including 1237 patients. Four models were trained to predict recurrence: random forests, boosted trees, and two neural networks. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to select the best model based on the highest area under the curve (AUC). For time to recurrence, we compared random forests and Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) model to Cox proportional hazards. RESULTS: The random forest was the best model to predict recurrence in HGEC; the AUCs were 85.2%, 74.1%, and 71.8% in the training, validation, and test sets, respectively. The top five predictors were: stage, uterus height, specimen weight, adjuvant chemotherapy, and preoperative histology. Performance increased to 77% and 80% when stratified by Stage III and IV, respectively. For time to recurrence, there was no difference between the LASSO and Cox proportional hazards models (c-index 71%). The random forest had a c-index of 60.5%. CONCLUSIONS: A bootstrap random forest model may be a more accurate technique to predict recurrence in HGEC using multiple clinicopathologic factors. For time to recurrence, machine-learning methods performed similarly to the Cox proportional hazards model.

Comparison of outcomes between abdominal, minimally invasive and combined vaginal-laparoscopic hysterectomy in patients with stage IAI/IA2 cervical cancer: 4C (Canadian Cervical Cancer Collaborative) study.

OBJECTIVE: Although minimally invasive hysterectomy (MIS-H) has been associated with worse survival compared to abdominal hysterectomy (AH) for cervical cancer, only 8% of patients in the LACC trial had microinvasive disease (Stage IA1/IA2). We sought to determine differences in outcome among patients undergoing MIS-H, AH or combined vaginal-laparoscopic hysterectomy (CVLH) for microinvasive cervical cancer. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing hysterectomy (radical and non radical) for FIGO 2018, microinvasive cervical cancer across 10 Canadian centers between 2007 and 2019 was performed. Recurrence free survival (RFS) was estimated using Kaplan Meier Survival analysis. Chi-square and log-rank tests were used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: 423 patients with microinvasive cervical cancer were included; 259 (61.2%) Stage IA1 (22/8.5% with LVSI) and 164(38.8%) IA2. The median age was 44 years (range 24-81). The most frequent histology was squamous (59.4%). Surgical approach was: 50.1% MIS-H (robotic or laparoscopic), 35.0% AH and 14.9% CVLH. Overall, 70.9% underwent radical hysterectomy and 76.5% had pelvic lymph node assessment. There were 16 recurrences (MIS-H:4, AH:9, CVLH: 3). No significant difference in 5-year RFS was found (96.7% MIS-H, 93.7% AH, 90.0% CVLH, p = 0.34). In a sub-analysis of patients with IA1 LVSI+/IA2(n = 186), survival results were similar. Further, there was no significant difference in peri-operative complications (p = 0.19). Patients undergoing MIS-H had a shorter median length of stay(0 days vs 3 (AH) vs. 1.5 (CVLH), p < 0.001), but had more ER visits (16.0% vs 3.6% (AH), 3.5% (CVLH), p = 0.036). CONCLUSION: In this cohort, including only patients with microinvasive cervical cancer, no difference in recurrence was found by surgical approach. This may be due to the low rate of recurrence making differences hard to detect or due to a true lack of difference. Hence, this patient population may benefit from MIS without compromising oncologic outcomes.

Treatment outcomes and predictive factors in patients ≥70 years old with advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate treatment outcomes, survival, and predictive factors in patients ≥70 with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC). METHODS: A retrospective single institution cohort study of women ≥70 with Stage III-IV AEOC between 2010 and 2018. Patients had either primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with interval cytoreductive surgery (ICS), chemotherapy alone, or no treatment. Demographics, surgical outcome, complications, and survival outcome were compared between groups. RESULTS: Among 248 patients, 69 (27.7%) underwent PCS, 99 (39.9%) had ICS, 56 (22.5%) had chemotherapy alone. Twenty-four (9.6%) remained untreated. Optimal cytoreduction (≤1 cm) was achieved in 72.4% of PCS and 77.8% of NACT/ICS (p = 0.34), without difference in grade ≥3 postoperative complications (15.9% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.37). Progression-free survival (PFS) was 23.5 months in PCS and 15.0 months in ICS patients (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.4, p = 0.041). Patients in the surgical arms, PCS or ICS, had better 2-year overall survival (OS) compared to chemotherapy alone (79%, 68%, 41%, respectively, HR: 3.58, p < 0.001). In a subgroup analysis, patients ≥80 had improved 2-year OS when treated with NACT compared to PCS (82% vs. 57%) and a trend toward improved PFS. Age, stage, and CA-125 were determinants of undergoing PCS. CONCLUSION: In patients ≥70 with AEOC, surgery should not be deferred based on age alone. Fit, well selected patients ≥70 can benefit from PCS, while patients ≥80 might benefit from NACT over PCS.

Validation of the KELIM score as a predictor of response to neoadjuvant treatment in patients with advanced high grade serous ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to externally validate the KELIM (rate of elimination of CA-125 elimation) score in patients with high grade serous ovarian cancer(HGSC)undergoing NACT and determine its relation to outcome of cytoreduction, platinum sensitivity, progression free(PFS) and overall survival(OS). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with Stage III-IV HGSC diagnosed between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2019 and treated with NACT. KELIM score was calculated using at least 3 CA-125 values within the first 100 days of chemotherapy. Demographic parameters were collected and Kaplan Meier survival analyses were performed for PFS and OS. This study was approved by local ethics board. RESULTS: 217 patients met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 28.93 months(range 2.86-135.06). There was no significant difference in stage, functional status, cytoreductive outcome or BRCA status(germline or somatic) between patients with a KELIM ≥ 1 and <1. Patients with a KELIM<1 had a lower median PFS (13.58 vs 19.69, p < 0.001), median platinum free interval(PFI) (7.66 vs 13.64, p < 0.001) and 5-year OS (57% vs 72%, p = 0.0140) compared to patients with KELIM≥1 . After adjusting for stage, treatment delays, bevacizumab or poly adenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase(parp)-inhibitor use, and BRCA status, patients with KELIM<1 had a high risk of disease progression(HR = 1.57 (95% CI 1.08-2.28) and death(HR = 1.99 (95% CI 1.01-3.95) compared to KELIM≥1. BRCA status was independently associated to an increase on KELIM score (OR = 1.917, 95% CI 1.046-3.512, p = 0.035). CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced HGSC undergoing NACT with a KELIM <1 were more likely to have platinum-resistant disease, worse PFS and worse OS when compared to patients with KELIM≥1. The KELIM score can be a helpful tool to predict chemo-response and aid in treatment decision making.

Gynecologic oncology treatment modifications or delays in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in a publicly funded versus privately funded North American tertiary cancer center.

OBJECTIVE: To compare gynecologic oncology surgical treatment modifications and delays during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between a publicly funded Canadian versus a privately funded American cancer center. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of all planned gynecologic oncology surgeries at University Health Network (UHN) in Toronto, Canada and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) in Boston, USA, between March 22,020 and July 302,020. Surgical treatment delays and modifications at both centers were compared to standard recommendations. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 450 surgical gynecologic oncology patients were included; 215 at UHN and 235 at BWH. There was a significant difference in median time from decision-to-treat to treatment (23 vs 15 days, p < 0.01) between UHN and BWH and a significant difference in treatment delays (32.56% vs 18.29%; p < 0.01) and modifications (8.37% vs 0.85%; p < 0.01), respectively. On multivariable analysis adjusting for age, race, treatment site and surgical priority status, treatment at UHN was an independent predictor of treatment modification (OR = 9.43,95% CI 1.81-49.05, p < 0.01). Treatment delays were higher at UHN (OR = 1.96,95% CI 1.14-3.36 p = 0.03) and for uterine disease (OR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.11-5.33, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: During the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic, gynecologic oncology patients treated at a publicly funded Canadian center were 9.43 times more likely to have a surgical treatment modification and 1.96 times more likely to have a surgical delay compared to an equal volume privately funded center in the United States.

Similar Overall Survival Using Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Primary Debulking Surgery in Patients Aged Over 75 Years with High-Grade Ovarian Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a hypothesis-generating evaluation of patient outcomes following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) compared with those following primary debulking surgery (PDS) in patients over age 75 with high-grade ovarian cancer. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients aged 75 years and older, with high-grade ovarian cancer. Data were analyzed in SPSS 25.0 using descriptive statistics to characterize groups based on primary treatment modality, Kaplan-Meier survival curves to estimate overall and progression-free survival, and Cox proportional hazards to analyze confounders. RESULTS: Of 429 patients with stages III and IV high-grade ovarian cancer (endometrioid and serous), 71 were aged older than 75 years and met our criteria for inclusion; 58 were treated with NACT while 13 underwent primary debulking. Sixteen patients did not undergo interval debulking following NACT. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the groups. Following NACT, more patients were completely debulked-36.2% versus 21% (P = 0.000)-and had a shorter length of stay (5 vs. 7 d; P = 0.018). Overall survival was similar between the NACT and PDS groups (58.7 vs. 59.7 mo; LR -0.836; P = 0.361) despite lower progression-free survival in the NACT group (25.9 vs. 47.1 mo; P = 0.042; LR 4.31). Both progression-free and overall survival were significantly higher when patients undergoing NACT achieved complete debulking (21.7 and 102.3 mo, respectively) compared with suboptimal debulking (12.03 and 14.2 mo, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this select group older patients with stage III and IV high-grade ovarian cancers, neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be considered without compromising outcomes and contributes to complete debulking.

BRCA testing in women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer: gynecologic oncologist-initiated testing compared with genetics referral.

OBJECTIVE: Up to 15% of patients with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma harbor a mutation in BRCA genes. Early notion of mutation status may facilitate counseling, predict prognosis, and increase access to Parp-inhibitors. The aim of this study was to examine the rate of germline genetic testing in a retrospective cohort of women with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma to determine if a new pilot project of gynecologic oncologist-initiated genetic testing improved the rate of testing, after 1 year of implementation. METHODS: Gynecologic oncology-initiated genetic testing was implemented at a single university hospital center with input and collaboration from gynecological oncologists, nurses, and genetic counselors. All patients diagnosed with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma after August 2017 were offered gynecologic oncologist- initiated genetic testing for a panel of 13 hereditary breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. Data from this group was then compared with a historic cohort of patients who received traditional genetic counseling between January 2014 and August 2017 (control group). Patients that had genetic testing through a clinical trial were excluded. The primary outcome was the uptake of genetic testing in both groups. Secondary outcomes included difference in time from diagnosis to genetic result between both cohorts. Data was analyzed using SPSS 25.0 and medians (ranges) were reported. RESULTS: A total of 152 women with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma were included in this study. Between January 2014 to July 2017 there were 108 patients with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma, among which 50.9% (n=54) underwent genetic testing following referral to genetics. The prevalence of BRCA pathogenic variants was 25.9% (14/54): 9.2% (5/54) in BRCA1 and 16.7% (9/54) in BRCA2. The median time from diagnosis to genetics referral was 53 days (range; 3-751), and median time from diagnosis to test result disclosure was 186 days (range; 15-938). After 1 year of implementation of the gynecologic oncologist-initiated genetic testing model, among 44 women diagnosed with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma, 86.2% underwent genetic testing. The median time from diagnosis to result disclosure decreased to 58 days, representing a reduction of 128 days, or 4.27 months (P<0.001). Reasons for non-testing included refusal, death, and follow-up at another hospital. The prevalence of germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants was 21% (8/38). CONCLUSION: Gynecologic oncologist-initiated genetic testing at the time of high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma diagnosis leads to increased uptake and decreased delays in testing compared with referral for traditional genetic counseling.

Occult Tubal Carcinoma After Risk-Reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of the literature to estimate the prevalence and outcomes of occult tubal carcinoma in BRCA mutation carriers and high-risk patients undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. DATA SOURCE: A search was done using OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov between 1946 and March 2019 with keywords and MeSH terms selected by an expert medical librarian and coauthors. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers performed study selection with an initial screen on abstracts and a second on full articles. Articles were rejected if they were irrelevant to the study question, pertained to a different population or did not report occult tubal neoplasia. Quality was assessed using methodologic index for nonrandomized studies criteria. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Data were extracted and recorded in an Excel database. Forest plots for the prevalence of occult carcinoma were done using STATA. Among 2,402 studies assessed, 27 met the inclusion criteria for qualitative and quantitative analysis. A total of 6,283 patients underwent risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy between 2002 and 2019: 2,894 cases were BRCA1, 1,579 BRCA2, and 1,810 high-risk based on family history. Among these, 75 patients were diagnosed with occult tubal carcinoma at the time of surgery. The pooled prevalence was 1.2% (I=7.1%, P=.363) occurring at a median age of 53.2 years (range 42.4-67). In a subanalysis of 18 studies reporting follow-up data, 10 recurrences (18.7%, 95% CI 7.5-53%) and 24 cases of post-risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy peritoneal cancer (0.54%, 95% CI 0.4-1.9%) were reported after a median follow-up of 52.5 months. BRCA1, older age, and previous breast cancer were more often associated with occult malignancy. CONCLUSION: Occult tubal carcinomas found at risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in high-risk patients and BRCA mutation carriers have significant potential for recurrence despite the frequent administration of postoperative chemotherapy.

CA-125 reduction during neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with success of cytoreductive surgery and outcome of patients with advanced high-grade ovarian cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The objective was to assess whether an early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with advanced ovarian cancer may predict short- and long-term clinical outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of all women with stage III-IV tubo-ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy at a single center in Montreal between 2003 and 2014. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) levels during neoadjuvant chemotherapy and debulking success. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios and their respective 95% CI for death and recurrence. Harrell's concordance indices were calculated to evaluate which variables best predicted the chemotherapy-free interval and overall survival in our population. RESULTS: In all, 105 women were included. Following the first, second, and third cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, CA-125 levels had a median reduction of 43.2%, 85.4%, and 92.9%, respectively, compared with CA-125 levels at diagnosis. As early as the second cycle, CA-125 was associated with overall survival (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.05, per 50 U/mL increment). By the third cycle, CA-125 did not only predict overall survival (hazard ratio 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.08), but it predicted overall survival better than the success of debulking surgery (Harrell's concordance index 0.646 vs 0.616). Both absolute CA-125 levels and relative reduction in CA-125 levels after 2 and 3 cycles predicted the chance to achieve complete debulking (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Reduction of CA-125 levels during neoadjuvant chemotherapy provides an early predictive tool that strongly correlates with successful cytoreductive surgery and long-term clinical outcome in women with advanced high-grade serous and endometrioid ovarian cancer.

Pretreatment with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist and an aromatase inhibitor may improve outcomes in in vitro fertilization cycles of women with stage I-II endometriosis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether 2 months of pretreatment with 5 mg of letrozole daily plus leuprolide acetate at 3.75 mg monthly in women with laparoscopically confirmed American Society of Reproductive Medicine stage I-II endometriosis improves in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: University-affiliated tertiary hospital. PATIENT(S): Women with laparoscopically confirmed endometriosis treated in the period from 2012 to 2016. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Primary outcomes: clinical pregnancy and live-birth rate; secondary outcomes: stimulation parameters and pregnancy. RESULT(S): A total of 68 patients were included in the final analysis. Thirty-six women received a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist and an aromatase inhibitor (AI), and 32 women received a GnRH agonist alone. The women did not differ in mean age, antral follicle count, basal serum level of follicle-stimulating hormone, or previous pregnancies. The stimulation parameters were similar between both groups: gonadotropin dose, number of collected oocytes, number of blastocysts. All women underwent a single blastocyst transfer. The grade of embryos transferred did not differ. Clinical pregnancy (24 [66.7%] vs. 13 [40.6%]) and live-birth (22 [61.1%] vs 10 [31.3%]) rates improved with aromatase inhibitor added to the GnRH agonist treatment versus a GnRH agonist alone. CONCLUSION(S): In this study, we present the first comparison in the medical literature comparing IVF outcomes in women with minimal and mild endometriosis pretreated with a GnRH agonist with or without an AI. This prospective cohort study suggests that combining these two treatment modalities which work at different sites may improve pregnancy outcomes with IVF treatment.

Robotic Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Population-Based Study of Adoption and Immediate Postoperative Outcomes in the United States.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the use of robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in the United States, with secondary outcomes of perioperative complications, hospital length of stay (LOS), immediate postoperative mortality, cost and a subanalysis compared with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: Data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS), a government-funded database of hospitalization in the United States. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: All women with cervical cancer undergoing RH between 2008 and 2015 in the United States and included in the NIS database. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Trends in surgical modality, baseline characteristics, LOS, perioperative outcomes, mortality, and hospital charges were compared between RRH and ARH. Regression models were adjusted for baseline characteristics. Among 41,317 women with cervical cancer, 3563 underwent RH, including 21.0% with a robotic procedure, 6.5% with a laparoscopic procedure, and 72.5% with open surgery. The annual rates of ARH declined significantly over the study period, whereas those of RRH increased. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the RRH and ARH groups. Compared with the ARH group, women undergoing RRH had a lower rate of cumulative postoperative complications (18.16% vs 21.21%; odds ratio [OR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-1.0; p = .05), including lower rates of wound infection (0.27% vs 1.82%; OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03-0.6; p < .01), sepsis (0.27% vs 1.20%; OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.05-0.9; p = .03), fever (1.87% vs 4.06%; OR, 0.44, 95% CI, 0.3-0.8; p < .01), and ileus (2.8% vs 9.13%; OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12-0.4; p < .01). The LOS was significantly shorter in the RRH group (median, 2 days vs 4 days; p < .01). The total median hospitalization charge was $47,218 for the RRH group, compared with $38,877 for the ARH group (p < .01). CONCLUSION: RRH is being increasingly performed in the United States and is associated with shorter LOS and less postoperative morbidity; however, long-term oncologic outcomes require additional attention.