Raman spectroscopy and multivariate analysis for the non invasive diagnosis of clinically inconclusive vulval lichen sclerosus.

Vulval lichen sclerosus (LS) is a common inflammatory condition associated with an increased risk of developing vulval carcinoma. Diagnosis is usually clinical although biopsy is necessary if the diagnosis is uncertain or if there is a failure to respond to adequate initial treatment. Raman spectroscopy has the potential to be applied in vivo for near real time objective non-invasive optical diagnosis, avoiding the need for invasive tissue biopsies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of Raman spectroscopy for differentiating LS from other vulval conditions in fresh vulval biopsies. Biopsies were analysed from 27 women with suspected LS in whom the attending gynaecologist could not establish the diagnosis on clinical presentation alone. Spectral variance was explored using principal component analysis and in conjunction with the histological diagnoses was used to develop and test a multivariate linear discriminant classification model. This model was validated with leave one sample out cross validation and the diagnostic performance of the technique assessed in comparison with the pathology gold standard. After cross validation the technique was able to correctly differentiate LS from other inflammatory vulval conditions with a sensitivity of 91% and specificity of 80%. This study demonstrates Raman spectroscopy has potential as a technique for in vivo non-invasive diagnosis of vulval skin conditions. Applied in the clinical setting this technique may reduce the need for invasive tissue biopsy. Further in vivo study is needed to assess the ability of Raman spectroscopy to diagnose other vulval conditions before clinical application.

A systematic review evaluating the relationship between progression free survival and post progression survival in advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Although overall survival is the ultimate goal of cancer therapy, many clinical and health economic decisions are taken when only progression free survival (PFS) data are available. This study evaluates the relationship between PFS and post progression survival (i.e. the time between disease progression and death) to estimate how many months a new drug for ovarian cancer might add to overall survival if the number of months the drug added to PFS (relative to a standard drug) was already known. METHODS: A literature search was conducted over Medline for randomised controlled trials published between January 1990 and July 2010 that evaluated the effect of a drug treatment in comparison to alternative drug treatment in patients with either advanced stage primary or recurrent ovarian cancer. A systematic review of progression free and post progression survival (PPS) was performed. The relationship between PFS and PPS was evaluated by a graphical method and standard statistical tests. RESULTS: Thirty-seven trials involving 15,850 patients met the inclusion criteria. The review found that increases in median PFS generally lead to little change in post-progression survival. Percentage gains in PFS are generally associated with no percentage gains or with very slight percentage gains or losses in post-progression survival CONCLUSION: If the effect of a new drug treatment for ovarian cancer is to extend median PFS by x months, then it is reasonable to estimate that the treatment will also extend median overall survival by x months. This information will be useful for individual and collective decision making.

British Gynaecological Cancer Society (BGCS) vulval cancer guidelines: Recommendations for practice.

The purpose of this guideline is to collate evidence and propose evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of adult patients with vulva carcinoma treated in the UK. Malignant melanoma may present via similar routes and will be discussed. The reader is referred to the Ano-uro-genital Mucosal Melanoma Full Guideline [1] for more detailed recommendations. The management of vulval sarcoma is outside of the scope of this guideline. For further information, including details of guideline development and GRADE of recommendations, please see BGCS website for details (https://www.bgcs.org.uk/professionals/guidelines-for-recent-publications/).

Effect of quality of gynaecological ultrasonography on management of patients with suspected ovarian cancer: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography for differentiating between benign and malignant adnexal masses is proportional to the expertise of the operator. However, we do not know whether improved diagnostic accuracy will affect the management of these tumours. We assessed the effect of the quality of gynaecological ultrasonography on the management of patients with suspected ovarian cancer in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS: 165 patients who were referred to the regional gynaecological cancer centre at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust (London, UK), between June 7, 2004, and April 23, 2006, with suspected adnexal tumours met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 150 patients were randomly assigned to either level II (routine) ultrasonography (n=73) or to level III (expert) ultrasonography (n=77). The primary endpoint was the number of major surgical staging procedures (including a laparotomy and at least an oophorectomy and omental biopsy) in each group of the study. Secondary endpoints were: total number of surgical procedures; number of minimally invasive procedures (eg, operative laparoscopy or ultrasonography-guided cyst aspiration); number of additional diagnostic tests (eg, CT or laparoscopy); number of follow-up scans; diagnostic accuracy of level II and level III ultrasonography; and duration of hospital stay. All analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered on the Current Controlled Trials website http://www.controlled-trials.com/mrct/trial/230201/ISRCTN02631195. FINDINGS: More major surgical staging procedures for suspected ovarian cancer were done in the level II group than in the level III group of the study (27 of 73 [37%] vs 17 of 77 [22%], respectively; difference between groups 15% [95% CI 0-29]; RR 1.68 [1.00-2.81]; p=0.049). The total number of surgical procedures was similar between the two groups: 35 of 73 (48%) in the level II group and 33 of 77 (43%) in the level III group (RR 1.12 [0.79-1.59]; p=0.53). The median duration of hospital stay for patients who were operated on was 6 days (range 3-13) in the level II group and 5 days (range 1-9) in the level III group (p=0.01). A likely histological diagnosis was provided to clinicians after ultrasonography for 76 of 77 (99%) patients in the level III group compared with only 38 of 73 (52%) patients in the level II group. 18 of 150 (12%) patients recruited were eventually diagnosed with ovarian malignancy. The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography was 2 of 5 (40%; [95% CI 6.5-84.6]) and 10 of 10 (100%; [34-100]), respectively, in the level II group and 7 of 8 (88%; [47-98]) and 27 of 28 (96%; [82-99]), respectively, in the level III group. INTERPRETATION: Improved quality of ultrasonography has a measurable effect on the management of patients with suspected ovarian cancer in a tertiary gynaecology cancer centre, and results in a significant decrease in the number of major staging procedures and a shorter inpatient hospital stay.