Optimization of media components for enhanced carotenoid production by Paracoccus marcusii RSPO1 and assessment of their cytotoxicity against A549 and vero cells.

In this study, we tried to explore the influence of various tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle intermediates on carotenoid production and with a focus on enhancing pigment biosynthesis, we conducted two statistical analysis. In case of TCA intermediates influence on pigment production by Paracoccus marcusii RSPO1; fumaric acid, and malic acid were observed as potent enhancers of pigment biosynthesis. Further, to optimize key media components for enhanced carotenoid production, the Plackett-Burman design was employed encompassing carbon, nitrogen sources, TCA cycle intermediates, and metal salts. The selected factors after Plackett Burman were fine-tuned through Response Surface Methodology and the optimal concentrations that have remarkably elevated carotenoid production were starch-2.24 g/l, MgSO4-0.416 g/l, ZnSO4-0.0157 g/l, and fumaric Acid-16 mM. Further, evaluation of pigment cytotoxicity against normal (Vero) and Non-Small Cell Carcinoma (A549) cells was performed. The resultant IC50 values were quantified as 161.3 µg/ml and 7.623 µg/ml for Vero and A549 cells, respectively. Moreover, a reactive oxygen species (ROS) determination study in A549 cells was done which have shown a noteworthy threefold ROS production in A549 cells through fluorescence spectroscopic observation. This implies that the bacterial carotenoids can act as potent pro-oxidants against cancerous cells while being nontoxic toward normal cells.

Residual Disease After Primary Surgical Treatment for Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer, Part 2: Network Meta-analysis Incorporating Expert Elicitation to Adjust for Publication Bias.

BACKGROUND: Previous work has identified a strong association between the achievements of macroscopic cytoreduction and improved overall survival (OS) after primary surgical treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Despite the use of contemporary methodology, resulting in the most comprehensive currently available evidence to date in this area, opponents remain skeptical. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: We aimed to conduct sensitivity analyses to adjust for potential publication bias, to confirm or refute existing conclusions and recommendations, leveraging elicitation to incorporate expert opinion. We recommend our approach as an exemplar that should be adopted in other areas of research. DATA SOURCES: We conducted random-effects network meta-analyses in frequentist and Bayesian (using Markov Chain Montel Carlo simulation) frameworks comparing OS across residual disease thresholds in women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer after primary cytoreductive surgery. Elicitation methods among experts in gynecology were used to derive priors for an extension to a previously reported Copas selection model and a novel approach using effect estimates calculated from the elicitation exercise, to attempt to adjust for publication bias and increase confidence in the certainty of the evidence. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES: Analyses using data from 25 studies (n = 20,927 women) all showed the prognostic importance of complete cytoreduction (0 cm) in both frameworks. Experts accepted publication bias was likely, but after adjustment for their opinions, published results overpowered the informative priors incorporated into the Bayesian sensitivity analyses. Effect estimates were attenuated but conclusions were robust in all analyses. CONCLUSIONS: There remains a strong association between the achievement of complete cytoreduction and improved OS even after adjustment for publication bias using strong informative priors formed from an expert elicitation exercise. The concepts of the elicitation survey should be strongly considered for utilization in other meta-analyses.

Residual Disease Threshold After Primary Surgical Treatment for Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer, Part 1: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: We present a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) that is the precursor underpinning the Bayesian analyses that adjust for publication bias, presented in the same edition in AJT. The review assesses optimal cytoreduction for women undergoing primary advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) surgery. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: To assess the impact of residual disease (RD) after primary debulking surgery in women with advanced EOC. This review explores the impact of leaving varying levels of primary debulking surgery. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a systematic review and random-effects NMA for overall survival (OS) to incorporate direct and indirect estimates of RD thresholds, including concurrent comparative, retrospective studies of ≥100 adult women (18+ years) with surgically staged advanced EOC (FIGO stage III/IV) who had confirmed histological diagnoses of ovarian cancer. Pairwise meta-analyses of all directly compared RD thresholds was previously performed before conducting this NMA, and the statistical heterogeneity of studies within each comparison was evaluated using recommended methods. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES: Twenty-five studies (n = 20,927) were included. Analyses demonstrated the prognostic importance of complete cytoreduction to no macroscopic residual disease (NMRD), with a hazard ratio for OS of 2.0 (95% confidence interval, 1.8-2.2) for <1 cm RD threshold versus NMRD. NMRD was associated with prolonged survival across all RD thresholds. Leaving NMRD was predicted to provide longest survival (probability of being best = 99%). The results were robust to sensitivity analysis including only those studies that adjusted for extent of disease at primary surgery (hazard ratio 2.3, 95% confidence interval, 1.9-2.6). The overall certainty of evidence was moderate and statistical adjustment of effect estimates in included studies minimized bias. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm a strong association between complete cytoreduction to NMRD and improved OS. The NMA approach forms part of the methods guidance underpinning policy making in many jurisdictions. Our analyses present an extension to the previous work in this area.

ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer - Update 2023.

In 2018, the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO) jointly with the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) published evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Given the large body of new evidence addressing the management of cervical cancer, the three sister societies jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines. The update includes new topics to provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in cervical cancer.To serve on the expert panel (27 experts across Europe) ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated practicing clinicians who are involved in managing patients with cervical cancer and have demonstrated leadership through their expertise in clinical care and research, national and international engagement, profile, and dedication to the topics addressed. To ensure the statements were evidence based, new data identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the international development group. Before publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 155 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives.These updated guidelines are comprehensive and cover staging, management, follow-up, long-term survivorship, quality of life and palliative care. Management includes fertility sparing treatment, early and locally advanced cervical cancer, invasive cervical cancer diagnosed on a simple hysterectomy specimen, cervical cancer in pregnancy, rare tumors, recurrent and metastatic diseases. The management algorithms and the principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined.

Ultra-radical (extensive) surgery versus standard surgery for the primary cytoreduction of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is the seventh most common cancer among women and the leading cause of death in women with gynaecological malignancies. Opinions differ regarding the role of ultra-radical (extensive) cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer treatment. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and morbidity associated with ultra-radical/extensive surgery in the management of advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (2021, Issue 11), MEDLINE Ovid and Embase Ovid up to November 2021. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or non-randomised studies (NRS), analysed using multivariate methods, that compared ultra-radical/extensive and standard surgery in women with advanced primary epithelial ovarian cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed whether potentially relevant studies met the inclusion criteria, abstracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We identified three NRS and conducted meta-analyses where possible. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three retrospective observational studies for inclusion in the review. Two studies included women exclusively undergoing upfront primary debulking surgery (PDS) and the other study including both PDS and interval debulking surgical (IDS) procedures. All studies were at critical risk of bias due to retrospective and non-randomised study designs. Meta-analysis of two studies, assessing 397 participants, found that women who underwent radical procedures, as part of PDS, may have a lower risk of mortality compared to women who underwent standard surgery (adjusted HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; I2 = 0%; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. The results were robust to a sensitivity analysis including women with more-extensive disease (carcinomatosis) (adjusted HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.85; I2 = 0%; n = 283, very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. One study reported a comparison of radical versus standard surgical procedures associated with both PDS and IDS procedures, but a multivariate analysis was only undertaken for disease-free survival (DFS) and therefore the certainty of the evidence was not assessable for overall survival (OS) and remains very low. The lack of reporting of OS meant the study was at high risk of bias for selective reporting of outcomes. One study, 203 participants, found that women who underwent radical procedures as part of PDS may have a lower risk of disease progression or death compared to women who underwent standard surgery (adjusted HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.92; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. The results were robust to a sensitivity analysis in one study including women with carcinomatosis (adjusted HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.82; n = 139; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. A combined analysis in one study found that women who underwent radical procedures (using both PDS and IDS) may have an increased chance of disease progression or death than those who received standard surgery (adjusted HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.31; I2 = 0%; n = 527; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. In absolute and unadjusted terms, the DFS was 19.3 months in the standard surgery group, 15.8 in the PDS group and 15.9 months in the IDS group. All studies were at critical risk of bias and we only identified very low-certainty evidence for all outcomes reported in the review. Perioperative mortality, adverse events and quality of life (QoL) outcomes were either not reported or inadequately reported in the included studies. Two studies reported perioperative mortality (death within 30 days of surgery), but they did not use any statistical adjustment. In total, there were only four deaths within 30 days of surgery in both studies. All were observed in the standard surgery group, but we did not report a risk ratio (RR) to avoid potentially misleading results with so few deaths and very low-certainty evidence. Similarly, one study reported postoperative morbidity, but the authors did not use any statistical adjustment. Postoperative morbidity occurred more commonly in women who received ultra-radical surgery compared to standard surgery, but the certainty of the evidence was very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found only very low-certainty evidence comparing ultra-radical surgery and standard surgery in women with advanced ovarian cancer. The evidence was limited to retrospective, NRSs and so is at critical risk of bias. The results may suggest that ultra-radical surgery could result in improved OS, but results are based on very few women who were chosen to undergo each intervention, rather than a randomised study and intention-to-treat analysis, and so the evidence is very uncertain. Results for progression/DFS were inconsistent and evidence was sparse. QoL and morbidity was incompletely or not reported in the three included studies. A separate prognostic review assessing residual disease as a prognostic factor in this area has been addressed elsewhere, which demonstrates the prognostic effect of macroscopic debulking to no macroscopic residual disease. In order to aid existing guidelines, the role of ultra-radical surgery in the management of advanced-stage ovarian cancer could be addressed through the conduct of a sufficiently powered, RCT comparing ultra-radical and standard surgery, or well-designed NRSs, if this is not possible.

Impact of residual disease as a prognostic factor for survival in women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer after primary surgery.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is the seventh most common cancer among women and a leading cause of death from gynaecological malignancies. Epithelial ovarian cancer is the most common type, accounting for around 90% of all ovarian cancers. This specific type of ovarian cancer starts in the surface layer covering the ovary or lining of the fallopian tube. Surgery is performed either before chemotherapy (upfront or primary debulking surgery (PDS)) or in the middle of a course of treatment with chemotherapy (neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and interval debulking surgery (IDS)), with the aim of removing all visible tumour and achieving no macroscopic residual disease (NMRD). The aim of this review is to investigate the prognostic impact of size of residual disease nodules (RD) in women who received upfront or interval cytoreductive surgery for advanced (stage III and IV) epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). OBJECTIVES: To assess the prognostic impact of residual disease after primary surgery on survival outcomes for advanced (stage III and IV) epithelial ovarian cancer. In separate analyses, primary surgery included both upfront primary debulking surgery (PDS) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS). Each residual disease threshold is considered as a separate prognostic factor. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (2021, Issue 8), MEDLINE via Ovid (to 30 August 2021) and Embase via Ovid (to 30 August 2021). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included survival data from studies of at least 100 women with advanced EOC after primary surgery. Residual disease was assessed as a prognostic factor in multivariate prognostic models. We excluded studies that reported fewer than 100 women, women with concurrent malignancies or studies that only reported unadjusted results. Women were included into two distinct groups: those who received PDS followed by platinum-based chemotherapy and those who received IDS, analysed separately. We included studies that reported all RD thresholds after surgery, but the main thresholds of interest were microscopic RD (labelled NMRD), RD 0.1 cm to 1 cm (small-volume residual disease (SVRD)) and RD > 1 cm (large-volume residual disease (LVRD)). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible, we synthesised the data in meta-analysis. To assess the adequacy of adjustment factors used in multivariate Cox models, we used the 'adjustment for other prognostic factors' and 'statistical analysis and reporting' domains of the quality in prognosis studies (QUIPS) tool. We also made judgements about the certainty of the evidence for each outcome in the main comparisons, using GRADE. We examined differences between FIGO stages III and IV for different thresholds of RD after primary surgery. We considered factors such as age, grade, length of follow-up, type and experience of surgeon, and type of surgery in the interpretation of any heterogeneity. We also performed sensitivity analyses that distinguished between studies that included NMRD in RD categories of < 1 cm and those that did not. This was applicable to comparisons involving RD < 1 cm with the exception of RD < 1 cm versus NMRD. We evaluated women undergoing PDS and IDS in separate analyses. MAIN RESULTS: We found 46 studies reporting multivariate prognostic analyses, including RD as a prognostic factor, which met our inclusion criteria: 22,376 women who underwent PDS and 3697 who underwent IDS, all with varying levels of RD. While we identified a range of different RD thresholds, we mainly report on comparisons that are the focus of a key area of clinical uncertainty (involving NMRD, SVRD and LVRD). The comparison involving any visible disease (RD > 0 cm) and NMRD was also important. SVRD versus NMRD in a PDS setting In PDS studies, most showed an increased risk of death in all RD groups when those with macroscopic RD (MRD) were compared to NMRD. Women who had SVRD after PDS had more than twice the risk of death compared to women with NMRD (hazard ratio (HR) 2.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.80 to 2.29; I2 = 50%; 17 studies; 9404 participants; moderate-certainty). The analysis of progression-free survival found that women who had SVRD after PDS had nearly twice the risk of death compared to women with NMRD (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.16; I2 = 63%; 10 studies; 6596 participants; moderate-certainty). LVRD versus SVRD in a PDS setting When we compared LVRD versus SVRD following surgery, the estimates were attenuated compared to NMRD comparisons. All analyses showed an overall survival benefit in women who had RD < 1 cm after surgery (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.32; I2 = 0%; 5 studies; 6000 participants; moderate-certainty). The results were robust to analyses of progression-free survival. SVRD and LVRD versus NMRD in an IDS setting The one study that defined the categories as NMRD, SVRD and LVRD showed that women who had SVRD and LVRD after IDS had more than twice the risk of death compared to women who had NMRD (HR 2.09, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.66; 310 participants; I2 = 56%, and HR 2.23, 95% CI 1.49 to 3.34; 343 participants; I2 = 35%; very low-certainty, for SVRD versus NMRD and LVRD versus NMRD, respectively). LVRD versus SVRD + NMRD in an IDS setting Meta-analysis found that women who had LVRD had a greater risk of death and disease progression compared to women who had either SVRD or NMRD (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.11; 6 studies; 1572 participants; I2 = 58% for overall survival and HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.52; 1145 participants; I2 = 60% for progression-free survival; very low-certainty). However, this result is biased as in all but one study it was not possible to distinguish NMRD within the < 1 cm thresholds. Only one study separated NMRD from SVRD; all others included NMRD in the SVRD group, which may create bias when comparing with LVRD, making interpretation challenging. MRD versus NMRD in an IDS setting Women who had any amount of MRD after IDS had more than twice the risk of death compared to women with NMRD (HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.29, I2 = 81%; 906 participants; very low-certainty). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In a PDS setting, there is moderate-certainty evidence that the amount of RD after primary surgery is a prognostic factor for overall and progression-free survival in women with advanced ovarian cancer. We separated our analysis into three distinct categories for the survival outcome including NMRD, SVRD and LVRD. After IDS, there may be only two categories required, although this is based on very low-certainty evidence, as all but one study included NMRD in the SVRD category. The one study that separated NMRD from SVRD showed no improved survival outcome in the SVRD category, compared to LVRD. Further low-certainty evidence also supported restricting to two categories, where women who had any amount of MRD after IDS had a significantly greater risk of death compared to women with NMRD. Therefore, the evidence presented in this review cannot conclude that using three categories applies in an IDS setting (very low-certainty evidence), as was supported for PDS (which has convincing moderate-certainty evidence).

Weekly dose-dense chemotherapy in first-line epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma treatment (ICON8): primary progression free survival analysis results from a GCIG phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Carboplatin and paclitaxel administered every 3 weeks is standard-of-care first-line chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer. The Japanese JGOG3016 trial showed a significant improvement in progression-free and overall survival with dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and 3-weekly carboplatin. In this study, we aimed to compare efficacy and safety of two dose-dense weekly regimens to standard 3-weekly chemotherapy in a predominantly European population with epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, women with newly diagnosed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IC-IV epithelial ovarian cancer were randomly assigned to group 1 (carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]5 or AUC6 and 175 mg/m2 paclitaxel every 3 weeks), group 2 (carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 every 3 weeks and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly), or group 3 (carboplatin AUC2 and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly). Written informed consent was provided by all women who entered the trial. The protocol had the appropriate national research ethics committee approval for the countries where the study was conducted. Patients entered the trial after immediate primary surgery, or before neoadjuvant chemotherapy with subsequent planned delayed primary surgery. The trial coprimary outcomes were progression-free survival and overall survival. Data analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis, and were powered to detect a hazard ratio of 0·75 in progression-free survival. The main comparisons were between the control group (group 1) and each of the weekly research groups (groups 2 and 3). FINDINGS: Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 women were randomly assigned to treatment. 72% (365), completed six protocol-defined treatment cycles in group 1, 60% (305) in group 2, and 63% (322) in group 3, although 90% (454), 89% (454), and 85% (437) completed six platinum-based chemotherapy cycles, respectively. Paclitaxel dose intensification was achieved with weekly treatment (median total paclitaxel dose 1010 mg/m2 in group 1; 1233 mg/m2 in group 2; 1274 mg/m2 in group 3). By February, 2017, 1018 (65%) patients had experienced disease progression. No significant progression-free survival increase was observed with either weekly regimen (restricted mean survival time 24·4 months [97·5% CI 23·0-26·0] in group 1, 24·9 months [24·0-25·9] in group 2, 25·3 months [23·9-26·9] in group 3; median progression-free survival 17·7 months [IQR 10·6-not reached] in group 1, 20·8 months [11·9-59·0] in group 2, 21·0 months [12·0-54·0] in group 3; log-rank p=0·35 for group 2 vs group 1; group 3 vs 1 p=0·51). Although grade 3 or 4 toxic effects increased with weekly treatment, these effects were predominantly uncomplicated. Febrile neutropenia and sensory neuropathy incidences were similar across groups. INTERPRETATION: Weekly dose-dense chemotherapy can be delivered successfully as first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer but does not significantly improve progression-free survival compared with standard 3-weekly chemotherapy in predominantly European populations. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Health Research Board in Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, Cancer Australia.

Post-operative pancreatic fistula following splenectomy with or without distal pancreatectomy at cytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Splenectomy with or without distal pancreatectomy may be necessary at time of cytoreductive surgery to achieve complete cytoreduction in advanced ovarian cancer. However, these procedures have been associated with peri-operative morbidity. The aims of this study were to determine the incidence of distal pancreatectomy among patients undergoing splenectomy during cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer and to determine the incidence, management, treatment, and prognosis of patients with post-operative pancreatic fistula. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients with FIGO stage IIIC-IVB ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who underwent splenectomy with or without distal pancreatectomy, during primary, interval, or secondary cytoreductive surgery between January 2007 and December 2017. All histologic subtypes were included; patients with borderline ovarian tumor and those undergoing emergency surgery were excluded from analysis. Univariate analyses for survival were generated by Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank (Mantel-Cox) tests for statistical significance. Patients who underwent surgery for recurrence were excluded from survival analysis. Inter-group statistics were performed using Student's t-test for continuous variables, and chi-square test and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. RESULTS: A total of 156/804 (19.4%) women underwent splenectomy, and of these 22 (14.1%) patients had distal pancreatectomy. Of patients who underwent splenectomy only, 2/134 (1.5%) developed grade B post-operative pancreatic fistula and 6/22 (27.3%) patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy developed grade B and C post-operative pancreatic fistula. Five (83.3%) of six of these patients were symptomatic. Distal pancreatectomy patients had a higher risk of developing post-operative pancreatic fistula when compared with patients who underwent splenectomy only (63.7% vs 9.7%, p=0.0001). Median length of hospital stay was longer in patients with post-operative pancreatic fistula: 16.5 (range 7-38) days compared with 10 (range 7-15) days (p=0.019). There was no progression-free survival (p=0.42) and disease-specific survival (p=0.33) difference between patients undergoing splenectomy with or without distal pancreatectomy. CONCLUSION: Clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula is a relatively frequent complication (27.3%) following distal pancreatectomy and it is a possible complication after splenectomy only (1.5%).

European Society of Gynaecological Oncology quality indicators for surgical treatment of cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing and ensuring the quality of surgical care is essential to improve the management and outcome of patients with cervical cancer.To develop a list of quality indicators for surgical treatment of cervical cancer that can be used to audit and improve clinical practice. METHODS: Quality indicators were developed using a four-step evaluation process that included a systematic literature search to identify potential quality indicators, in-person meetings of an ad hoc group of international experts, an internal validation process, and external review by a large panel of European clinicians and patient representatives. RESULTS: Fifteen structural, process, and outcome indicators were selected. Using a structured format, each quality indicator has a description specifying what the indicator is measuring. Measurability specifications are also detailed to define how the indicator will be measured in practice. Each indicator has a target which gives practitioners and health administrators a quantitative basis for improving care and organizational processes. DISCUSSION: Implementation of institutional quality assurance programs can improve quality of care, even in high-volume centers. This set of quality indicators from the European Society of Gynaecological Cancer may be a major instrument to improve the quality of surgical treatment of cervical cancer.

Laterally Extended Pelvic Resection for Gynaecological Malignancies: A Multicentric Experience with Out-of-the-Box Surgery.

PURPOSE: To evaluate morbidity and oncological outcome in a multicentre series of women with gynaecological malignancies infiltrating pelvic side wall (PSW) that received laterally extended pelvic resection (LEPR). METHODS: Patients operated between 2007 and 2017 at three institutions were included. LEPR was defined as an en bloc lateral resection of a pelvic tumour involving sidewall muscle, and/or bone, and/or major nerve, and/or major vascular structure. Postsurgical complications and survivals were evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty-three women with gynaecological tumours involving PSW were treated with LEPR. Five women underwent primary LEPR, whereas 58 (92%) patients needed LEPR because of recurrence. Twenty-four women (38%) received previous radiation therapy before the surgery. R0 resection was achieved in 54 patients (85.7%), whereas the pathologic margins were microscopically and macroscopically positive in 8 (12.7%) patients and 1 (1.6%) patient, respectively. There was one perioperative death, whereas major postoperative complications occurred in 17 patients (27.7%). Thirty (47.5%) women experienced recurrences: 24/54 (44.4%) were in the R0 group, and 6/9 (66.6%) were in the R1 group, with a median PFS of 15 months and 7 months, respectively (p = 0.024). In total, 11 of 54 (20.3%) patients died of disease in the R0 group and 5 of 9 (55.5%) in the R1 group; a median OS was not reached and was 32 months for R0 and R1 groups, respectively (p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: Involvement of the PSW should not prevent obtaining R0 resection. Although the LEPR is associated with considerable morbidity (≈ 30%), a long-term survival seems to be achieved in those women with complete resection.

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Cervical Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite significant advances in the screening, detection, and treatment of preinvasive cervical lesions, invasive cervical cancer is the fifth most common cancer in European women. There are large disparities in Europe and worldwide in the incidence, management, and mortality of cervical cancer. OBJECTIVE: The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines in order to improve the quality of care for women with cervical cancer across Europe and worldwide. METHODS: The ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of cervical cancer (23 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence based, the current literature identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 159 international reviewers, selected through ESGO/ESTRO/ESP and including patient representatives. RESULTS: The guidelines cover comprehensively staging, management, and follow-up for patients with cervical cancer. Management includes fertility sparing treatment; stage T1a, T1b1/T2a1, clinically occult cervical cancer diagnosed after simple hysterectomy; early and locally advanced cervical cancer; primary distant metastatic disease; cervical cancer in pregnancy; and recurrent disease. Principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are defined.

Locally advanced vulva cancer: A single centre review of anovulvectomy and a systematic review of surgical, chemotherapy and radiotherapy alternatives. Is an international collaborative RCT destined for the "too difficult to do" box?

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of locally advanced vulva cancer (LAVC) remains challenging. Due to the lack of randomised trials many questions regarding the indications for different treatment options and their efficacy remain unanswered. METHODS: In this retrospective study we provide the largest published series of LAVC patients treated with anovulvectomy, reporting oncological outcomes and morbidity. Additionally, a systematic literature review was performed for all treatment options 1946-2015. RESULTS: In our case series, 57/70 (81%) patients were treated in the primary setting with anovulvectomy and 13 patients underwent anovulvectomy for recurrent disease. The median overall survival (OS) was 69months (1-336) with disease specific survival of 159months (1-336). Following anovulvectomy for primary disease, time to progression and OS were significantly higher in node negative disease (10 vs. 96months; 19 vs. 121months, p<0.0001). Post-surgical complications were observed in 36 (51.4%), the majority of which were Grade I/II infections. There was one peri-operative death. Review of the literature showed that chemotherapy, radiotherapy or combination treatments are alternatives to surgery. Evidence relating to all of these consisted mostly of small retrospective series, which varied considerably in terms of patient characteristics and treatment schedules. Significant patient and treatment heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis with significant biases in these studies. It was unclear if survival or morbidity was better in any one group with a lack of data reporting complications, quality of life, and long term follow-up. However, results for chemoradiation are encouraging enough to warrant further investigation. CONCLUSIONS: There remains inadequate evidence to identify an optimal treatment for LAVC. However, there is sufficient evidence to support a trial of anovulvectomy versus chemoradiation. Discussions and consensus would be needed to determine trial criteria including the primary outcome measure. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy alone may be best reserved for the palliative setting or metastatic disease.

Patient Support Groups Identifying Clinical Equipoise in UK Gynaecological Oncology Surgeons as the Basis for Trials in Ultraradical Surgery for Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

"Clinical equipoise" is defined as the genuine uncertainty by the expert medical community of the most beneficial treatment. A survey performed in 2013 by a patient support group, Ovacome, of gynaecological oncologists in the UK on ultra-radical surgery in advanced ovarian cancer has shown that there is a wide variation in surgical practice across the country. In addition, there were mixed views on the quality of published evidence justifying it's performance, signifying a state of clinical equipoise. The survey also identified widespread insufficient infra-structural resources and lack of surgical training and skills. The majority of respondents would be prepared to undertake additional training to acquire the surgical skills and/or refer to other centres/surgeons already performing the surgery and/or recruit to surgical trials investigating ultra-radical surgery in advanced ovarian cancer.

Sister Society Meeting on Global Education Development and Collaboration: Meeting Report.

OBJECTIVES: To identify common barriers to teaching and training and to identify strategies that would be useful in developing future training programs in gynecologic oncology in low- and middle- income countries. METHODS: There is a lack of overall strategy to meet the needs of education and training in gynecologic oncology in low- and middle- income countries, the leaderships of sister societies and global health volunteers met at the European Society of Gynecologic Oncology in October 23, 2015. The challenges of the training programs supported by gynecologic oncology societies, major universities and individual efforts were presented and discussed. Strategies to improve education and training were identified. RESULTS: Major challenges include language barriers, limited surgical equipment, inadequate internet access, lack of local support for sustainability in training programs, inadequate pathology and radiation oncology, finance and a global deficiency in identifying sites and personnel in partnering or developing training programs. The leaderships identified various key components including consultation with the local Ministry of Health, local educational institutions; inclusion of the program into existing local programs, a needs assessment, and the development of curriculum and regional centers of excellence. CONCLUSIONS: Proper preparation of training sites and trainers, the development of global curriculum, the establishment of centers of excellence, and the ability to measure outcomes are important to improve education and training in gynecologic oncology in low- and middle- income countries.

Intraoperative frozen section analysis for the diagnosis of early stage ovarian cancer in suspicious pelvic masses.

BACKGROUND: Women with suspected early-stage ovarian cancer need surgical staging which involves taking samples from areas within the abdominal cavity and retroperitoneal lymph nodes in order to inform further treatment. One potential strategy is to surgically stage all women with suspicious ovarian masses, without any histological information during surgery. This avoids incomplete staging, but puts more women at risk of potential surgical over-treatment.A second strategy is to perform a two-stage procedure to remove the pelvic mass and subject it to paraffin sectioning, which involves formal tissue fixing with formalin and paraffin embedding, prior to ultrathin sectioning and multiple site sampling of the tumour. Surgeons may then base further surgical staging on this histology, reducing the rate of over-treatment, but conferring additional surgical and anaesthetic morbidity.A third strategy is to perform a rapid histological analysis on the ovarian mass during surgery, known as 'frozen section'. Tissues are snap frozen to allow fine tissue sections to be cut and basic histochemical staining to be performed. Surgeons can perform or avoid the full surgical staging procedure depending on the results. However, this is a relatively crude test compared to paraffin sections, which take many hours to perform. With frozen section there is therefore a risk of misdiagnosing malignancy and understaging women subsequently found to have a presumed early-stage malignancy (false negative), or overstaging women without a malignancy (false positive). Therefore it is important to evaluate the accuracy and usefulness of adding frozen section to the clinical decision-making process. OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic test accuracy of frozen section (index test) to diagnose histopathological ovarian cancer in women with suspicious pelvic masses as verified by paraffin section (reference standard). SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (January 1946 to January 2015), EMBASE (January 1980 to January 2015) and relevant Cochrane registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies that used frozen section for intraoperative diagnosis of ovarian masses suspicious of malignancy, provided there was sufficient data to construct 2 x 2 tables. We excluded articles without an available English translation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Authors independently assessed the methodological quality of included studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (QUADAS-2) domains: patient selection, index test, reference standard, flow and timing. Data extraction converted 3 x 3 tables of per patient results presented in articles into 2 x 2 tables, for two index test thresholds. MAIN RESULTS: All studies were retrospective, and the majority reported consecutive sampling of cases. Sensitivity and specificity results were available from 38 studies involving 11,181 participants (3200 with invasive cancer, 1055 with borderline tumours and 6926 with benign tumours, determined by paraffin section as the reference standard). The median prevalence of malignancy was 29% (interquartile range (IQR) 23% to 36%, range 11% to 63%). We assessed test performance using two thresholds for the frozen section test. Firstly, we used a test threshold for frozen sections, defining positive test results as invasive cancer and negative test results as borderline and benign tumours. The average sensitivity was 90.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 87.6% to 92.0%; with most studies typically reporting range of 71% to 100%), and average specificity was 99.5% (95% CI 99.2% to 99.7%; range 96% to 100%).Similarly, we analysed sensitivity and specificity using a second threshold for frozen section, where both invasive cancer and borderline tumours were considered test positive and benign cases were classified as negative. Average sensitivity was 96.5% (95% CI 95.5% to 97.3%; typical range 83% to 100%), and average specificity was 89.5% (95% CI 86.6% to 91.9%; typical range 58% to 99%).Results were available from the same 38 studies, including the subset of 3953 participants with a frozen section result of either borderline or invasive cancer, based on final diagnosis of malignancy. Studies with small numbers of disease-negative cases (borderline cases) had more variation in estimates of specificity. Average sensitivity was 94.0% (95% CI 92.0% to 95.5%; range 73% to 100%), and average specificity was 95.8% (95% CI 92.4% to 97.8%; typical range 81% to 100%).Our additional analyses showed that, if the frozen section showed a benign or invasive cancer, the final diagnosis would remain the same in, on average, 94% and 99% of cases, respectively.In cases where the frozen section diagnosis was a borderline tumour, on average 21% of the final diagnoses would turn out to be invasive cancer.In three studies, the same pathologist interpreted the index and reference standard tests, potentially causing bias. No studies reported blinding pathologists to index test results when reporting paraffin sections.In heterogeneity analyses, there were no statistically significant differences between studies with pathologists of different levels of expertise. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In a hypothetical population of 1000 patients (290 with cancer and 80 with a borderline tumour), if a frozen section positive test result for invasive cancer alone was used to diagnose cancer, on average 261 women would have a correct diagnosis of a cancer, and 706 women would be correctly diagnosed without a cancer. However, 4 women would be incorrectly diagnosed with a cancer (false positive), and 29 with a cancer would be missed (false negative).If a frozen section result of either an invasive cancer or a borderline tumour was used as a positive test to diagnose cancer, on average 280 women would be correctly diagnosed with a cancer and 635 would be correctly diagnosed without. However, 75 women would be incorrectly diagnosed with a cancer and 10 women with a cancer would be missed.The largest discordance is within the reporting of frozen section borderline tumours. Investigation into factors leading to discordance within centres and standardisation of criteria for reporting borderline tumours may help improve accuracy. Some centres may choose to perform surgical staging in women with frozen section diagnosis of a borderline ovarian tumour to reduce the number of false positives. In their interpretation of this review, readers should evaluate results from studies most typical of their population of patients.

Pathological Risk Factors and Outcomes in Women With Stage IB2 Cervical Cancer Treated With Primary Radical Surgery Versus Chemoradiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: Both radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy and primary chemoradiotherapy have been shown to be effective in the management of women with stage IB2 cervical cancer. This study aims to review the outcomes related to each treatment modality and the effects of pathological risk factors on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 92 women with stage IB2 cervical cancer who were treated at the Northern Gynecological Oncology Center (Gateshead, United Kingdom) across a 22-year period between January 1991 and July 2013. Women were divided into those undergoing primary surgery and those undergoing primary radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy. The main outcome measures were OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Pathological risk factors of survival were assessed using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-seven women (72.8%) underwent primary surgery, and 25 women (27.2%) had primary radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy. Thirty-one of 67 women (46.3%) required adjuvant radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy after surgery because of positive lymph nodes in 77.4% of cases. The median follow-up was 57.5 months (range, 3-137 months). Thirty-two women (34.8%) had disease recurrence: 6 women (16.7%) in the group undergoing surgery alone, 15 women (48.4%) in the group requiring adjuvant treatment after surgery, and 11 women (44%) in the group having primary radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy. Overall survival and PFS were higher for women undergoing surgery alone (91.7% and 83.3%) compared with women requiring adjuvant treatment after surgery (54.8% and 51.4%) and those having primary radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy (60% and 56%) (P = 0.0004 and P = 0.005, respectively). Lymph node metastasis was a significant pathological risk factor of OS and PFS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Most women require adjuvant treatment after surgery because of positive lymph nodes. Because survival outcomes for women requiring dual treatment are similar to those for women undergoing primary chemoradiotherapy, nodal assessment before definitive treatment should guide the management of these women and identify a low-risk group that can be treated with surgery alone.

Activity, safety, and feasibility of cidofovir and imiquimod for treatment of vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (RT³VIN): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Vulval intraepithelial neoplasia is a skin disorder affecting the vulva that, if left untreated, can become cancerous. Currently, the standard treatment for patients with vulval intraepithelial neoplasia is surgery, but this approach does not guarantee cure and can be disfiguring, causing physical and psychological problems, particularly in women of reproductive age. We aimed to assess the activity, safety, and feasibility of two topical treatments--cidofovir and imiquimod--as an alternative to surgery in female patients with vulval intraepithelial neoplasia. METHODS: We recruited female patients (age 16 years or older) from 32 centres to an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial. Eligibility criteria were biopsy-proven vulval intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 and at least one lesion that could be measured accurately. We randomly allocated patients to topical treatment with either 1% cidofovir (supplied as a gel in a 10 g tube, to last 6 weeks) or 5% imiquimod (one 250 mg sachet for every application), to be self-applied three times a week for a maximum of 24 weeks. Randomisation (1:1) was done by stratified minimisation via a central computerised system, with stratification by hospital, disease focality, and presentation stage. The primary endpoint was a histologically confirmed complete response at the post-treatment assessment visit 6 weeks after the end of treatment (a maximum of 30 weeks after treatment started). Analysis of the primary endpoint was by intention to treat. Secondary outcomes were toxic effects (to assess safety) and adherence to treatment (to assess feasibility). We present results after all patients had reached the primary endpoint assessment point at 6 weeks; 2-year follow-up of complete responders continues. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN 34420460. FINDINGS: Between Oct 21, 2009, and Jan 11, 2013, 180 participants were enrolled to the study; 89 patients were randomly allocated cidofovir and 91 were assigned imiquimod. At the post-treatment assessment visit, a complete response had been achieved by 41 (46%; 90% CI 37·0-55·3) patients allocated cidofovir and by 42 (46%; 37·2-55·3) patients assigned imiquimod. After 6 weeks of treatment, 156 (87%) patients (78 in each group) had adhered to the treatment regimen. Five patients in the cidofovir group and seven in the imiquimod group either withdrew or were lost to follow-up before the first 6-week safety assessment. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were reported in 31 (37%) of 84 patients allocated cidofovir and 39 (46%) of 84 patients assigned imiquimod; the most frequent grade 3 and 4 events were pain in the vulva, pruritus, fatigue, and headache. INTERPRETATION: Cidofovir and imiquimod were active, safe, and feasible for treatment of vulval intraepithelial neoplasia and warrant further investigation in a phase 3 setting. Both drugs are effective alternatives to surgery for female patients with vulval intraepithelial neoplasia after exclusion of occult invasive disease. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Laparoscopic radical trachelectomy is an alternative to laparotomy with improved perioperative outcomes in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Radical trachelectomy is an established surgical approach for managing young women with cervical cancer wishing to preserve fertility. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic (LRT) and abdominal radical trachelectomy (ART). METHODS: We reviewed the records of all women undergoing either LRT or ART in our institution since 2004. Demographic data, clinicopathologic data, and perioperative outcomes were collected and compared between the 2 procedures. RESULTS: Overall, 27 women were identified. All of them had stage IB1 disease. Eleven (40.8%) women underwent LRT, whereas 16 (59.2%) women underwent ART. Age, parity, and body mass index, as well as histologic type, grade, and presence of lymphovascular space invasion were comparable between groups. The median length of the parametrial tissue removed was shorter in LRT versus ART (P = 0.022). The median blood loss and length of stay were significantly reduced in the LRT group (85 vs 800 mL, P < 0.001; and 4 versus 7 days, P = 0.003). The median operative time was longer with the laparoscopic approach (320 versus 192.5 minutes, P < 0.001). Early grade 1 to 2 postoperative morbidity (mainly high urinary residuals) was comparable between groups; however, more grade 3 and late morbidity events were recorded in the ART group. CONCLUSIONS: This first comparison study between LRT and ART for fertility preservation in women with cervical cancer shows that laparoscopy performed better in terms of blood loss and length of stay. Laparoscopic radical trachelectomy could be the preferred option for these patients; however, further studies are needed to confirm comparable survival outcomes.

Evaluation of follow-up strategies for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer following completion of primary treatment.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer and seventh commonest cause of death in women worldwide. Traditionally, many people who have been treated for cancer undergo long-term follow-up in secondary care. However, it has been suggested that the use of routine review may not be effective in improving survival, quality of life (QoL), or relieving anxiety, or both. In addition, traditional follow-up may not be cost-effective. OBJECTIVES: To compare the potential benefits of different strategies of follow-up in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer following completion of primary treatment. SEARCH METHODS: For this update we searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 7, 2013, MEDLINE and EMBASE from November 2010 to July 2013. We also searched reference lists of review articles and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated follow-up strategies for women with epithelial ovarian cancer following completion of primary treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: The authors did not identify any new studies that were eligible for inclusion in this update of the review. The search for the original review identified only one RCT that met the inclusion criteria, which included 529 women. This study reported data on immediate treatment of ovarian cancer relapse following rise of serum CA125 levels versus delaying treatment until symptoms developed. All the women participating had previous confirmation of remission, with normal CA125 concentration and no radiological evidence of disease, after surgery and first-line chemotherapy for ovarian cancer.Overall survival between the immediate and delayed arms showed no difference after a median follow-up of 56.9 months (unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.20; P value 0.85). Time from randomisation to first deterioration in global health score or death was shorter in the immediate treatment group than in the delayed treatment group (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.88; P value < 0.01). The trial was at low risk of bias. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Limited evidence from a single trial suggests that routine surveillance with CA125 in asymptomatic patients and treatment at CA125 relapse does not seem to offer survival advantage when compared to treatment at symptomatic relapse. RCTs are needed to compare different types of follow-up, looking at survival, QoL, cost and psychological effects as outcomes.