The prognosis of stage IA cervical cancer: Subgroup analysis of the SCCAN study.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with TNM T1a cervical cancer have excellent prognosis; however, the risk for recurrence remains an issue of concern and management guidelines are based on limited data. Here we performed subgroup analysis of the Surveillance in Cervical Cancer (SCCAN) consortium with the objective of defining the prognosis of T1a cervical cancer patients. METHODS: SCCAN was an international, multicentric, retrospective cohort study of patients with cervical cancer undergoing surgical treatment in tertiary centers. Inclusion criteria included: histologically confirmed cervical cancer treated between 2007 and 2016; TNM T1a; primary surgical management; and at least 1-year of follow-up data availability. Exclusion criteria included treatment with primary chemo-radiation, and missing treatment-related or clinical data. RESULTS: Out of 975 patients included, 554 (57 %) were T1a1 and 421 (43 %) T1a2. The majority had squamous-cell carcinoma (78 %). 79 patients (8.1 %) had lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI). 455 patients (47 %) underwent radical hysterectomy/ parametrectomy. Laparoscopic and open surgery was performed in 401 (41 %) and in 361 (37 %) patients, respectively. Adjuvant treatment was administered to 56 patients (5.7 %). Assessment of lymph nodes (LN) was performed in 524 patients (54 %), with LN involvement found in 15 (2.9 %). There were 40 (4.1 %) recurrences, occurring at a median of 26 months (4-106), out of which 33 (82.5 %) occurred in pelvis. Among T1a1 cases, there were 10 recurrences (2.0 %) if LVSI was negative, and 3 recurrences (6.7 %) if LVSI was positive. Among T1a2 cases, there were 23 recurrences (6.7 %) if LVSI was negative, and 4 recurrences (5.1 %) if LVSI was positive. There were 3 recurrences in the LN+ group (recurrence rate 20 %). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of recurrence in T1a cervical cancer was 4.1 % corresponding to the rates seen in patients with FIGO 1B cancer in recently published prospective trials. LN involvement represents a risk factor for disease recurrence. Our results indicate that stage T1a cervical cancer, apart from T1a1 LVSI negative disease, should follow the same principles in the management as that of FIGO stage 1B cancer.

Survival associated with the use of sentinel lymph node in addition to lymphadenectomy in early-stage cervical cancer treated with surgery alone: A sub-analysis of the Surveillance in Cervical CANcer (SCCAN) collaborative study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of sentinel lymph node (SLN) in addition to lymphadenectomy was associated with survival benefit in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. METHODS: International, multicenter, retrospective study. INCLUSION CRITERIA: cervical cancer treated between 01/2007 and 12/2016 by surgery only; squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, adenosquamous carcinoma, FIGO 2009 stage IB1-IIA2, negative surgical margins, and laparotomy approach. Patients undergoing neo-adjuvant and/or adjuvant treatment and/or with positive para-aortic lymph nodes, were excluded. Women with positive pelvic nodes who refused adjuvant treatment, were included. Lymph node assessment was performed by SLN (with ultrastaging protocol) plus pelvic lymphadenectomy ('SLN' group) or pelvic lymphadenectomy alone ('non-SLN' group). RESULTS: 1083 patients were included: 300 (27.7 %) in SLN and 783 (72.3 %) in non-SLN group. 77 (7.1 %) patients had recurrence (N = 11, 3.7 % SLN versus N = 66, 8.4 % non-SLN, p = 0.005) and 34 (3.1 %) (N = 4, 1.3 % SLN versus N = 30, 3.8 % non-SLN, p = 0.033) died. SLN group had better 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) (96.0 %,95 %CI:93.5-98.5 versus 92.0 %,95 %CI:90.0-94.0; p = 0.024). No 5-year overall survival (OS) difference was shown (98.4 %,95 %CI:96.8-99.9 versus 96.8 %,95 %CI:95.4-98.2; p = 0.160). SLN biopsy and lower stage were independent factors associated with improved DFS (HR:0.505,95 %CI:0.266-0.959, p = 0.037 and HR:2.703,95 %CI:1.389-5.261, p = 0.003, respectively). Incidence of pelvic central recurrences was higher in the non-SLN group (1.7 % versus 4.5 %, p = 0.039). CONCLUSION: Adding SLN biopsy to pelvic lymphadenectomy was associated with lower recurrence and death rate and improved 5-year DFS. This might be explained by the lower rate of missed nodal metastasis thanks to the use of SLN ultrastaging. SLN biopsy should be recommended in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

Highlights from the 25th European Congress on Gynaecological Oncology in Barcelona: the ENYGO-IJGC Fellow Interviews.

In March 2024, 12 European Network of Young Gynae Oncologists-International Journal of Gynaecological Cancer (ENYGO-IJGC) Editorial Fellows conducted 10 interviews with senior opinion leaders on original and controversial topics in the field of gynecologic oncology presented during the 25th European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) Congress in Barcelona, Spain. This article provides a summary and overview of the content of these discussions summarizing key points presented at the meeting. These selected interviews were chosen by consensus by the ENYGO-IJGC Editorial Fellows based on novelty and relevance to the field of gynecologic oncology.

Approach to radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer after the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial and associated complications: a National Surgical Quality Improvement Program study.

BACKGROUND: The Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer study results revolutionized our understanding of the best surgical management for this disease. After its publication, the guidelines state that the standard and recommended approach for radical hysterectomy is an open abdominal approach. Nevertheless, the effect of the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial on real-world changes in the surgical approach to radical hysterectomy remains elusive. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the trends and routes of radical hysterectomy and to evaluate postoperative complication rates before and after the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial (2018). STUDY DESIGN: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry was used to examine radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer performed between 2012 and 2022. This study excluded vaginal radical hysterectomies and simple hysterectomies. The primary outcome measures were the trends in the route of surgery (minimally invasive surgery vs laparotomy) and surgical complication rates, stratified by periods before and after the publication of the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial in 2018 (2012-2017 vs 2019-2022). The secondary outcome measure was major complications associated specifically with the different routes of surgery. RESULTS: Of the 3611 patients included, 2080 (57.6%) underwent laparotomy, and 1531 (42.4%) underwent minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. There was a significant increase in the minimally invasive surgery approach from 2012 to 2017 (45.6% in minimally invasive surgery in 2012 to 75.3% in minimally invasive surgery in 2017; P<.01) and a significant decrease in minimally invasive surgery from 2018 to 2022 (50.4% in minimally invasive surgery in 2018 to 11.4% in minimally invasive surgery in 2022; P<.001). The rate of minor complications was lower in the period before the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial than after the trial (317 [16.9%] vs 288 [21.3%], respectively; P=.002). The major complication rates were similar before and after the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial (139 [7.4%] vs 78 [5.8%], respectively; P=.26). The rates of blood transfusions and superficial surgical site infections were lower in the period before the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial than in the period after the trial (137 [7.3%] vs 133 [9.8%] [P=.012] and 20 [1.1%] vs 53 [3.9%] [P<.001], respectively). In a comparison of minimally invasive surgery vs laparotomy radical hysterectomy during the entire study period, patients in the minimally invasive surgery group had lower rates of minor complications than in those in the laparotomy group (190 [12.4%] vs 472 [22.7%], respectively; P<.001), and the rates of major complications were similar in both groups (100 [6.5%] in the minimally invasive surgery group vs 139 [6.7%] in the laparotomy group; P=.89). In a specific complications analysis, the rates of blood transfusion and superficial surgical site infections were lower in the minimally invasive surgery group than in the laparotomy group (2.4% vs 12.7% and 0.6% vs 3.4%, respectively; P<.001; for both comparisons), and the rate of deep incisional surgical site infections was lower in the minimally invasive surgery group than in the laparotomy group (0.2% vs 0.7%, respectively; P=.048). In the multiple logistic regression analysis, the route of radical hysterectomy was not independently associated with the occurrence of major complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.65). CONCLUSION: Although the proportion of minimally invasive radical hysterectomies decreased abruptly after the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial, there was no change in the rate of major postoperative complications. In addition, the hysterectomy route was not associated with major postoperative complications.

Assessing minimally invasive simple hysterectomy in low risk cervical cancer: set up for the LASH trial.

After the publication of the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial, open surgery has become the standard approach for radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer. Recent studies assessed the role of a non-radical approach in low risk cervical cancer and showed no survival difference compared with radical hysterectomy. However, there is a gap in knowledge regarding the oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive simple hysterectomy in low risk cervical cancer. This review offers an overview of the current evidence on the role of the minimally invasive approach in low risk cervical cancer and raises the need for a new clinical trial in this setting.

Cervical cancer: a new era.

Cervical cancer is a major global health issue, ranking as the fourth most common cancer in women worldwide. Depending on stage, histology, and patient factors, the standard management of cervical cancer is a combination of treatment approaches, including (fertility- or non-fertility-sparing) surgery, radiotherapy, platinum-based chemotherapy, and novel systemic therapies such as bevacizumab, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and antibody-drug conjugates. While ambitious global initiatives seek to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the management of cervical cancer continues to evolve with major advances in imaging modalities, surgical approaches, identification of histopathological risk factors, radiotherapy techniques, and biomarker-driven personalized therapies. In particular, the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors has dramatically altered the treatment of cervical cancer, leading to significant survival benefits in both locally advanced and metastatic/recurrent settings. As the landscape of cervical cancer therapies continues to evolve, the aim of the present review is to provide a comprehensive discussion of the current state and the latest practice-changing updates in cervical cancer.

Robotic Surgery in Gynecologic Oncology-A Bibliometric Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To characterize robotic surgery publications in gynecologic oncology, and to identify factors associated with high citation metrics. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study SETTING: Original articles on robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology. PATIENTS: No patients involved. INTERVENTIONS: Robotic surgeries in gynecologic oncology. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We performed PubMed Medical Subject Headings search for original articles on robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology. We analyzed citation scores and income level of country of publication, as well as factors associated with high citation metrics. Overall, 566 studies during 2005 to 2023 were included. Of those 292, 51.6% were from North America, and 182 32.2% from Europe. The leading tumor site studied was endometrial cancer (57.4%). The majority (87.6%) of studies were retrospective and 13 (2.3%) were randomized controlled trials. Most studies (94.2%) originated in high-income countries. Articles from middle-income countries had lower citations per year as compared to high-income countries (median 1.6 vs 2.5, p =.002) and were published in lower-impact factor journals (median 2.6 vs 4.3, p < .001) when compared with high-income countries. Cervical cancer studies had higher representation in middle-income countries than in high-income countries (48.5% vs 18.4%, p < .001). In a multivariable regression analysis, journal's impact factor [aOR 95% CI 1.26 (1.12-1.40)], cervical cancer topic [aOR 95% CI 3.0 (1.58-5.91)], and North American publications [aOR 95% CI 2.07 (1.08-3.97)] were independently associated with higher number of citations per year. CONCLUSION: The majority of robotic surgery research in gynecologic oncology is retrospective and from high-income countries. Middle-income countries are not as frequently cited and are predominantly in lower-impact factor journals.

Secondary databases in gynecologic cancer research.

Observational and cohort studies using large databases have made important contributions to gynecologic oncology. Knowledge of the advantages and potential limitations of commonly used databases benefits both readers and reviewers. In this review, researchers familiar with National Cancer Database (NCDB), Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER), SEER-Medicare, MarketScan, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), and Premier, describe each database, its included data, access, management, storage, highlights, and limitations. A better understanding of these commonly used datasets can help readers, reviewers, and researchers to more effectively interpret and apply study results, evaluate new research studies, and develop compelling and practice-changing research.

Surgical site infection prevention bundle in gynecology oncology surgery: a key element in the implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program.

Surgical site infection rates are among 5-35% in all gynecologic oncology procedures. Such infections lead to increased patient morbidity, reduction in quality of life, higher likelihood of readmissions, and reinterventions, which contribute directly to mortality and increase in health-related costs. Some of these are potentially preventable by applying evidence-based strategies in the peri-operative patient setting. The objective of this review is to provide recommendations for the individual components that most commonly comprise the surgical site infection prevention bundles that could be implemented in gynecologic oncology procedures. We searched articles from relevant publications with specific topics related to each surgical site infection intervention chosen to be reviewed. Studies on each topic were selected with an emphasis on meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized control studies, non-randomized controlled studies, reviews, clinical practice guidelines, and case series. Data synthesis was done through content and thematic analysis to identify key themes in the included studies. This review intends to serve as the most up-to-date frame of evidence-based peri-operative care in our specialty and could serve as the first initiative to introduce an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program.

Notable surgical trials in gynecologic oncology: a 10-year overview.

In the last decade, we have witnessed important advances in novel therapeutics in the management of gynecologic cancers. These studies have built on the findings from preexisting data and have provided incremental contributions leading to changes that have not only impacted the accuracy of cancer detection and its metastatic components but also led to improvements in oncologic outcomes and quality of life. Key landmark trials have changed the standard of care in cervix, uterine, and ovarian cancer. A number of these have been controversial and have generated significant debate among gynecologic oncologists. The main objective of this review was to provide an overview on each of these trials as a reference for immediate and consolidated access to the study aims, methodology, results, and conclusion.

In Vivo Cytotoxic, Genotoxic and Radiosensitizing Effects of Clofarabine.

BACKGROUND/AIM: ClFdA is a second-generation antineoplastic agent that has demonstrated significant anticancer activity, particularly against acute lymphoblastic leukemia and has been shown to have radiosensitizing activity. The aim of the study was to explore the genotoxic, cytotoxic and radiosensitizing effects of clofarabine (ClFdA) on bone marrow cells (BMCs), normoblasts and leukocytes of mice in vivo. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cytotoxicity was determined by the reduction in reticulocytes (RET), and genotoxicity was determined by the induction of micronucleated reticulocytes (MN-RET) in the peripheral blood and by DNA break induction in leukocytes determined by single-cell gel electrophoresis (SCGE). The radiosensitizing capacity of ClFdA was determined in leukocytes and BMCs by SCGE. RESULTS: Two mechanisms of MN-RET induction were identified according to the antecedents, that could be due to inhibition of DNA synthesis and demethylation of G-C regions, and subsequent chromosome fragility. ClFdA cytotoxicity causes two contiguous peaks, an early peak that seems to inhibit MN-RET induction and a second peak that seems to be caused by ribonucleotide reductase (RR) and/or DNA synthesis inhibitions. ClFdA induced early DNA damage in noncycling leukocytes, and also radiosensitizes leukocytes immediately after treatment. ClFdA-ionizing radiation (IR) causes two time-dependent episodes of DNA damage, the latest after 80 min triggers a major breakage of DNA. In terms of the number of damaged cells, leukocytes and BMCs are similarly sensitive to ionizing radiation; BMCs are slightly more sensitive than leukocytes to ClFdA, but BMCs are doubly sensitive to combined treatment. CONCLUSION: ClFdA causes early DNA damage and radiosensitivity in non-proliferating leukocytes, which rules out the most favored hypotheses of the participation of RR and DNA polymerase inhibition.

LACC Trial: Final Analysis on Overall Survival Comparing Open Versus Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.The aim of this study was to compare overall survival between open and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with participants followed for 4.5 years. The primary objective was to evaluate whether minimally invasive surgery was noninferior in disease-free survival (DFS) to abdominal radical hysterectomy. Secondary outcomes included overall survival. Sample size was based on DFS of 90% at 4.5 years and 7.2% noninferiority margin for minimally invasive surgery. A total of 631 patients were enrolled: 319 assigned to minimally invasive and 312 to open surgery. Of these, 289 (90.6%) patients underwent minimally invasive surgery and 274 (87.8%) patients open surgery. At 4.5 years, DFS was 85.0% in the minimally invasive group and 96% in the open group (difference of -11.1; 95% CI, -15.8 to -6.3; P = .95 for noninferiority). Minimally invasive surgery was associated with lower rate of DFS compared with open surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 3.91 [95% CI, 2.02 to 7.58]; P < .001). Rate of overall survival at 4.5 years was 90.6% versus 96.2% for the minimally invasive and open surgery groups, respectively (HR for death of any cause = 2.71 [95% CI, 1.32 to 5.59]; P = .007). Given higher recurrence rate and worse overall survival with minimally invasive surgery, an open approach should be standard of care.

Association of reviewer experience with discriminating human-written versus ChatGPT-written abstracts.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if reviewer experience impacts the ability to discriminate between human-written and ChatGPT-written abstracts. METHODS: Thirty reviewers (10 seniors, 10 juniors, and 10 residents) were asked to differentiate between 10 ChatGPT-written and 10 human-written (fabricated) abstracts. For the study, 10 gynecologic oncology abstracts were fabricated by the authors. For each human-written abstract we generated a ChatGPT matching abstract by using the same title and the fabricated results of each of the human generated abstracts. A web-based questionnaire was used to gather demographic data and to record the reviewers' evaluation of the 20 abstracts. Comparative statistics and multivariable regression were used to identify factors associated with a higher correct identification rate. RESULTS: The 30 reviewers discriminated 20 abstracts, giving a total of 600 abstract evaluations. The reviewers were able to correctly identify 300/600 (50%) of the abstracts: 139/300 (46.3%) of the ChatGPT-generated abstracts and 161/300 (53.7%) of the human-written abstracts (p=0.07). Human-written abstracts had a higher rate of correct identification (median (IQR) 56.7% (49.2-64.1%) vs 45.0% (43.2-48.3%), p=0.023). Senior reviewers had a higher correct identification rate (60%) than junior reviewers and residents (45% each; p=0.043 and p=0.002, respectively). In a linear regression model including the experience level of the reviewers, familiarity with artificial intelligence (AI) and the country in which the majority of medical training was achieved (English speaking vs non-English speaking), the experience of the reviewer (ß=10.2 (95% CI 1.8 to 18.7)) and familiarity with AI (ß=7.78 (95% CI 0.6 to 15.0)) were independently associated with the correct identification rate (p=0.019 and p=0.035, respectively). In a correlation analysis the number of publications by the reviewer was positively correlated with the correct identification rate (r28)=0.61, p<0.001. CONCLUSION: A total of 46.3% of abstracts written by ChatGPT were detected by reviewers. The correct identification rate increased with reviewer and publication experience.