Prognostic value of isolated tumor cells in sentinel lymph nodes in low risk endometrial cancer: results from an international multi-institutional study.

OBJECTIVE: The prognostic significance of isolated tumor cells (≤0.2 mm) in sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) of endometrial cancer patients is still unclear. Our aim was to assess the prognostic value of isolated tumor cells in patients with low risk endometrial cancer who underwent SLN biopsy and did not receive adjuvant therapy. Outcomes were compared with node negative patients. METHODS: Patients with SLNs-isolated tumor cells between 2013 and 2019 were identified from 15 centers worldwide, while SLN negative patients were identified from Mayo Clinic, Rochester, between 2013 and 2018. Only low risk patients (stage IA, endometrioid histology, grade 1 or 2) who did not receive any adjuvant therapy were included. Primary outcomes were recurrence free, non-vaginal recurrence free, and overall survival, evaluated with Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: 494 patients (42 isolated tumor cells and 452 node negative) were included. There were 21 (4.3%) recurrences (5 SLNs-isolated tumor cells, 16 node negative); recurrence was vaginal in six patients (1 isolated tumor cells, 5 node negative), and non-vaginal in 15 (4 isolated tumor cells, 11 node negative). Median follow-up among those without recurrence was 2.3 years (interquartile range (IQR) 1.1-3.0) and 2.6 years (IQR 0.6-4.2) in the SLN-isolated tumor cell and node negative patients, respectively. The presence of SLNs-isolated tumor cells, lymphovascular space invasion, and International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) grade 2 were significant risk factors for recurrence on univariate analysis. SLN-isolated tumor cell patients had worse recurrence free survival (p<0.01) and non-vaginal recurrence free survival (p<0.01) compared with node negative patients. Similar results were observed in the subgroup of patients without lymphovascular space invasion (n=480). There was no difference in overall survival between the two cohorts in the full sample and the subset excluding patients with lymphovascular space invasion. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SLNs-isolated tumor cells and low risk profile, without adjuvant therapy, had a significantly worse recurrence free survival compared with node negative patients with similar risk factors, after adjusting for grade and excluding patients with lymphovascular space invasion. However, the presence of SLNs-isolated tumor cells was not associated with worse overall survival.

Distribution of prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) on PET-MRI in patients with and without ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Ovarian cancer is the most lethal cancer and future research needs to focus on the early detection and exploration of new therapeutic agents. The objectives of this proof-of-concept study are to assess the feasibility of PSMA 18F-DCFPyl PET/MR imaging for detecting ovarian cancer and to evaluate the PSMA distribution in patients with and without ovarian cancer. METHODS: This prospective pilot proof-of-concept study in patients with and without ovarian cancers occurred between October 2017 and January 2020. Patients were recruited from gynecologic oncology or hereditary ovarian cancer clinics, and underwent surgical removal of the uterus and ovaries for gynecologic indications. PSMA 18F-DCFPyl PET/MRI was obtained prior to standard of care surgery. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were scanned: four patients with normal ovaries, six patients with benign ovarian lesions, and four patients with malignant ovarian lesions. Tracer uptake in normal ovaries (SUVmax = 2.8 ± 0.4) was greater than blood pool (SUVmax = 1.8 ± 0.5, p < 0.0001). Tracer uptake in benign ovarian lesions (2.2 ± 1.0) did not differ significantly from blood pool (p = 0.331). Tracer uptake in ovarian cancer (SUVmax = 7.8 ± 3.8) was greater than blood pool (p < 0.0001), normal ovaries (p = 0.0014), and benign ovarian lesions (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: PET/MR imaging detected PSMA uptake in ovarian cancer, with little to no uptake in benign ovarian findings. These results are encouraging and further studies in a larger patient cohort would be useful to help determine the extent and heterogeneity of PSMA uptake in ovarian cancer patients.

Splenectomy at the time of primary or interval cytoreductive surgery for epithelial ovarian carcinoma: A review of outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: We describe post-operative complications after cytoreductive surgery with and without splenectomy for Stage III or IV epithelial ovarian cancer, and identify areas for quality improvement in post-splenectomy care. METHODS: All patients with ovarian cancer cytoreductive surgery from 2008 to 2018 were identified using an institutional database Gynecologic Oncology Longitudinal Data Collection and Utilization Program (GOLD CUP). We compared patients who had and did not have splenectomy as part of cytoreductive surgery by demographics, comorbidities, stage, operative and post-operative data, readmission rates, progression free survival, overall survival and death from disease. Quality metrics reported include receipt of post-splenectomy education handouts and encapsulated-organism vaccines. Statistical analysis was completed in STATA SE 16.0. RESULTS: We identified 47 patients who underwent splenectomy and 454 who did not during primary or interval cytoreductive surgery. Final stage was IIIB in 1 (2.1%), IIIC in 26 (55.3%), IVA in 7 (14.9%), and IVB in 13 (27.7%) patients. Those with splenectomy had significantly higher stage. Surgery duration and hospital length of stay were longer and blood transfusion more common after splenectomy, but there were no differences in post-operative infection, readmission, or overall survival. Pancreatic leaks were seen in 4/47 (8.5%) patients. Post-splenectomy vaccinations were documented in 42/47 (89.4%) patients. Only 2/47 (4.3%) received post-splenectomy discharge instructions and 3/7 (42.9%) received aspirin for platelets 1 million or more. CONCLUSIONS: While splenectomy adds morbidity, it continues to offer benefit in those patients who can achieve optimal cytoreduction. Areas for quality improvement in post-splenectomy care include receipt of vaccinations, patient discharge information, and timely pancreatic fistula management.

Improved Rates of Same-day Discharge in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Endometrial Cancer Following the COVID-19 Pandemic.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the rate of same-day discharge (SDD) after minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Teaching hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 166 patients underwent a minimally invasive surgery procedure for the indication of endometrial cancer at a large academic institution from September 1, 2019, to October 1, 2020-80 patients before the implementation of the COVID-19 restrictions and 86 patients after. INTERVENTIONS: COVID-19 pandemic with visitor restrictions and hospital policy changes placed on March 17, 2020. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: SDD rate was increased by 18% after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (40% vs 58%, p = .02). There were no differences between the 2 groups with regard to operative time (p = .07), estimated blood loss (p = .21), uterine weight (p = .12), age (p = .06), body mass index (p = .42), or surgery start time (p = .15). In a multivariable logistic regression model, subjects in the COVID-19 group had 3.08 times (95% confidence interval, 1.40-6.74; p = .01) higher odds of SDD than those in the pre-COVID-19 group. There was no difference in 30-day readmission rates (7.5% vs 5.8%, p = .66). CONCLUSION: There was a significant increase in the SDD of patients with endometrial cancer since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic has strained hospital resources and motivated patients and physicians to avoid hospitalization. This shows that with proper motivation, an increase in SDD rates is possible without an increase in complications or rehospitalization.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol is associated with lower post-operative opioid use and a reduced office burden after minimally invasive surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has decreased hospital opioid use, but less attention has been directed towards its impact on clinic burden with respect to post-operative care. Our objective was to determine the impact of an ERAS protocol on post-operative opioid prescribing, and the subsequent number of pain medication refill requests and unscheduled patient-provider interactions in the 30-day post-operative period. METHODS: IRB-approved retrospective study comparing post-operative opioid prescription practices 10 months before and 10 months after ERAS protocol implementation after minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. Opioid doses in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), number of unscheduled visits, and phone calls were compared before and after ERAS implementation. RESULTS: A total of 791 patients were included; 445 without and 346 with ERAS implementation. ERAS was associated with higher rates of same day discharge (49% vs 39%, p = 0.003) and lower readmission rates (2.0% vs 5.6%, p = 0.011). Post-operatively, patients who received the ERAS protocol were prescribed less opioids (197.8 vs. 223.5 MMEs, p = 0.0087). There was a trend towards less refill requests with ERAS (1.7% vs 3.6%, p = 0.11). ERAS was associated with a decreased number of post-operative phone calls (38% vs 46%, p = 0.023), including calls for pain (10% vs 16%, p = 0.021), and fewer unscheduled visits related to pain (1.5% vs 5.8%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the ERAS protocol resulted in a decrease in post-operative opioid prescribing. Despite the lower amount of prescribed post-operative opioids, the ERAS protocol translated into a decrease in the need for post-operative interactions with the clinic staff, specifically encounters associated with pain.

Evaluation and Management of Common Intraoperative and Postoperative Complications in Gynecologic Endoscopy.

Gynecologic laparoscopy is a safe and effective route of surgery for many types of procedures. The potential for injury does exist, and prevention and timely recognition of complications are essential for maintaining the quality and safety of minimally invasive surgical procedures. Each facet of care, including preoperative preparation, appropriate patient positioning, trocar placement, and surgical technique, is reviewed, and recommendations are made to facilitate the performance of safe surgery and immediate recognition of complications if they do arise.

Oncologic outcomes of endometrial cancer in patients with low-volume metastasis in the sentinel lymph nodes: An international multi-institutional study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess oncologic outcomes in endometrial cancer patients with low-volume metastasis (LVM) in the sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs). METHODS: Patients with endometrial cancer and SLN-LVM (≤2 mm) from December 3, 2009, to December 31, 2018, were retrospectively identified from 22 centers worldwide. Patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IV, adnexal involvement, or unknown adjuvant therapy (ATx) were excluded. RESULTS: Of 247 patients included, 132 had isolated tumor cell (ITC) and 115 had micrometastasis (MM). Overall 4-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 77.6% (95% CI, 70.2%-85.9%); median follow-up for patients without recurrence was 29.6 (interquartile range, 19.2-41.5) months. At multivariate analysis, Non-endometrioid (NE) (HR, 5.00; 95% CI, 2.50-9.99; P < .001), lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) (HR, 3.26; 95% CI, 1.45-7.31; P = .004), and uterine serosal invasion (USI) (HR, 3.70; 95% CI, 1.44-9.54; P = .007) were independent predictors of recurrence. Among 47 endometrioid ITC patients without ATx, 4-year RFS was 82.6% (95% CI, 70.1%-97.2). Considering 18 ITC patients with endometrioid grade 1 disease, without LVSI, USI, or ATx, only 1 had recurrence (median follow-up, 24.8 months). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with SLN-LVM, NE, LVSI, and USI were independent risk factors for recurrence. Patients with any risk factor had poor prognosis, even when receiving ATx. Patients with ITC and grade 1 endometrioid disease (no LVSI/USI) had favorable prognosis, even without ATx. Further analysis (with more patients and longer follow-up) is needed to assess whether ATx can be withheld in this low-risk subgroup.

A population-based study of causes of death after endometrial cancer according to major risk factors.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the most common causes of death and potentially modifiable risk factors in endometrial cancer patients. METHODS: 745 women diagnosed with incident endometrial cancer were enrolled in a population-based study from 1991 to 1994. Participants completed structured interviews about 1 year after diagnosis. Study files were linked with the National Death Index to identify dates and causes of death through 2016. Proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard rate ratios for cause of death adjusting for age and stage of disease. Hazard ratios were also examined according to comorbidities. RESULTS: Of the 745 women, 450 were deceased after a median of 19.9 years. The two most common causes of death were cardiovascular disease (N = 145, 32%) and any cancer (N = 135, 30%), with only 10% of women dying from endometrial cancer (N = 46). Obesity, diabetes and smoking increased risk of all-cause mortality (HRR 1.77, 95%CI 1.36-2.31; HRR 1.74, 95%CI 1.34-2.27; HRR 1.59, 95%CI 1.16-2.17). Diabetes also increased risk of cardiovascular disease-specific mortality (HRR 1.98, 95%CI 1.38-3.08), but not endometrial cancer mortality (HRR 0.55, 95%CI 0.21-1.48). Neither obesity nor smoking was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease-specific mortality (HRR 1.46, 95%CI 0.92-2.32; HRR 1.21, 95%CI 0.67-2.18) nor endometrial-cancer specific mortality (HRR 1.81, 95%CI 0.83-3.93; HRR 0.61, 95%CI 0.17-2.15). CONCLUSIONS: Endometrial cancer patients were 3 times more likely to die of cardiovascular disease than endometrial cancer. Obesity, smoking and diabetes increase the risk of death in these patients and are potentially modifiable. Clinical trials should be developed that incorporate counseling regarding these risk factors into survivorship care to determine impact on mortality.

Recurrence Rates in Patients With Cervical Cancer Treated With Abdominal Versus Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy: A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Review Study.

PURPOSE: To compare the disease-free survival (DFS) between open and minimally invasive radical hysterectomies (RH) performed in academic medical institutions. METHODS: Retrospective multi-institutional review of patients undergoing RH for stage IA1 (with lymphovascular invasion), IA2, and IB1 squamous, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2017. RESULTS: Of 815 patients, open RH was performed in 255 cases (29.1%) and minimally invasive RH in 560 cases (70.9%). There were 19 (7.5%) recurrences in the open RH and 51 (9.1%) recurrences in the minimally invasive group (P = .43). Risk-adjusted analysis revealed that minimally invasive RH was independently associated with an increased hazard of recurrence (aHR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.04 to 3.25). Other factors independently associated with an increased hazard of recurrence included tumor size, grade, and adjuvant radiation. Conization before surgery was associated with lower recurrence risk (aHR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.71). There was no difference in OS in the unadjusted analysis (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.61 to 2.11) or after risk adjustment (aHR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.5 to 2.2). Of 264 patients with tumors ≤ 2 cm on final pathology (excluding those with no residual tumor on final pathology), 2/82 (2.4%) recurred in the open RH group and 16/182 (8.8%) in the minimally invasive RH group (P = .058). In propensity score matching analysis, 7/159 (4.4%) recurrences were noted in the open RH group and 18/156 (11.5%) in the minimally invasive RH group (P = .019). Survival analysis revealed an increased risk of recurrence in the minimally invasive group in propensity-matched cohort (HR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.1 to 7.18). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective series, patients undergoing minimally invasive radical hysterectomy, including those with tumor size ≤ 2 cm on final pathology, had inferior DFS but not overall survival in the entire cohort.

BRCA Mutation Carriers: Breast and Ovarian Cancer Screening Guidelines and Imaging Considerations.

Patients who carry the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations have an underlying genetic predisposition for breast and ovarian cancers. These deleterious genetic mutations are the most common genes implicated in hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. This monograph summarizes the evidence behind current screening recommendations, reviews imaging protocols specific to this patient population, and illustrates some of the imaging nuances of breast and ovarian cancers in this clinical setting.

Abuse, cancer and sexual dysfunction in women: A potentially vicious cycle.

More than 30% of women have a history of abuse. Women with cancer may be at substantially increased risk for abuse, but this issue is rarely discussed in the course of oncology care. Women with a history of abuse who present for cancer care commonly have a high prevalence of co-morbid illness. Sexual dysfunction, a highly prevalent but under-recognized condition among women of all ages, is also more common among both women with a history of abuse and women with cancer. Although common after cancer, sexual dysfunction, like abuse, can be stigmatizing and often goes undiagnosed and untreated. This review first examines the literature for evidence of a relationship between any history of abuse and cancer among women, addressing two questions: 1) How does abuse promote or create risk for developing cancer? 2) How does cancer increase a woman's susceptibility to abuse? We then examine evidence for a relationship between abuse and female sexual dysfunction, followed by an investigation of the complex relationship between all three factors: abuse, sexual dysfunction and cancer. The literature is limited by a lack of harmonization of measures across studies, retrospective designs, and small and idiosyncratic samples. Despite these limitations, it is imperative that providers integrate the knowledge of this complex relationship into the care of women with cancer.

Evaluation of Human Papillomavirus as a Risk Factor for Preterm Birth or Pregnancy-Related Hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To compare rates of preterm birth and pregnancy-related hypertension in women with and without human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all women delivered at our institution in 2013 who had cervical cancer screening test results within 3 years before delivery. Patients were excluded if they had prior procedure(s) for cervical dysplasia other than biopsy. There were two primary outcomes: preterm birth (less than 37 weeks of gestation) and pregnancy-related hypertension (gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, or eclampsia). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounders including demographic variables, diabetes, prior preterm birth, chronic hypertension, and other genital infections. Assuming a 10% prevalence of HPV, a rate of 12% in the HPV-negative group for both preterm birth and pregnancy-related hypertension, α of 0.05, and ß of 0.2, we needed 2,207 patients to detect a 60% increase in the rate of either outcome in the HPV-positive group. RESULTS: A total of 3,958 patients delivered in 2013, of whom 2,321 met eligibility criteria, 242 (10.4%) of whom were HPV-positive and 2,079 (89.2%) of whom were HPV-negative. In multivariate analyses, the rate of preterm birth was not significantly different between HPV-positive and HPV-negative women (16.5% compared with 12.2%, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.9-1.9); rates of pregnancy-related hypertension also were not significantly different between HPV-positive and HPV-negative women (17.0% compared with 16.4%, adjusted OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.7-1.5). CONCLUSION: Maternal HPV infection is not an independent risk factor for preterm birth or pregnancy-related hypertension.

Cervical cancer screening: evidence behind the guidelines.

Cervical cancer screening involves a complex process of cytology, human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, colposcopy, and a multitude of algorithms for the identification of preinvasive disease and prevention of invasive disease. High-risk HPV is a prerequisite for the development of almost all types of cervical cancer; therefore, a test for high-risk HPV has become an integral part of new screening strategies. Major changes to screening guidelines in the last decade include initiation of screening at age 21 years, conservative management of young women with abnormal cytology, extended screening intervals for women age ≥30 years, and cessation of screening in low-risk women at age 65 years. This review will focus on the evidence that has led to the current evidence-based guidelines. Evidence regarding primary HPV testing as well as postvaccine-based screening strategies will also be reviewed.

The Impact of Diabetes on Gynecologic Cancer: Current Status and Future Directions.

Diabetes mellitus has reached epidemic proportions in both the United States and worldwide with most authorities reporting a doubling in the prevalence of diabetes over the last 20-30 years. While this epidemic is closely tied to obesity, diabetes mellitus presents potential clinical challenges over and above that observed with obesity alone. From a women's health care prospective, this rise in diabetes may impact a woman's health across her lifespan. More specifically, diabetes impacts not only pregnancy as well as well as other medical conditions, but increases the risk for the development of various malignancies. From a gynecologic cancer standpoint, diabetes is most closely associated with endometrial adenocarcinomas, although increasing attention is being placed upon diabetes and ovarian cancer. Attention is also being placed on the potential role of metformin and its impact on outcomes in diabetics with cancer, as well as a potential preventative and/or adjunctive therapy for gynecologic cancer.