Does the New FIGO 2018 Staging System Allow Better Prognostic Differentiation in Early Stage Cervical Cancer? A Dutch Nationwide Cohort Study.

The FIGO 2018 staging system was introduced to allow better prognostic differentiation in cervical cancer, causing considerable stage migration and affecting treatment options. We evaluated the accuracy of the FIGO 2018 staging in predicting recurrence free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to FIGO 2009 staging in clinically early stage cervical cancer. We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 2264 patients with preoperative FIGO (2009) IA1, IA2 and IB1 cervical cancer between 2007-2017. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to assess survival outcomes. Logistic regression was used to assess risk factors for lymph node metastasis and parametrial invasion. Stage migration occurred in 48% (22% down-staged, 26% up-staged). Survival data of patients down-staged from IB to IA1/2 disease were comparable with FIGO 2009 IA1/2 and better than patients remaining stage IB1. LVSI, invasion depth and parametrial invasion were risk factors for lymph node metastases. LVSI, grade and age were associated with parametrial invasion. In conclusion, the FIGO 2018 staging system accurately reflects prognosis in early stage cervical cancer and is therefore more suitable than the FIGO 2009 staging. However subdivision in IA1 or IA2 based on presence or absence of LVSI instead of depth of invasion would have improved accuracy. For patients down-staged to IA1/2, less radical surgery seems appropriate, although LVSI and histology should be considered when determining the treatment plan.

Improvement of Gynecological Screening of Female Renal Transplant Recipients by Self-Sampling for Human Papillomavirus Detection.

OBJECTIVES: Female renal transplant recipients (RTRs) have increased risk for developing human papillomavirus (HPV)-related (pre)malignancies of the lower genital tract. Annual cervical screening is advised for RTRs, but the participation rate is low. The aim of this study is to investigate whether HPV self-sampling is suitable for gynecological screening of RTRs to increase participation rate. METHODS: A large cohort of 253 RTRs was investigated for the prevalence of HPV. All participants received a device for a cervicovaginal self-sample. Questionnaires were sent to assess the experience with this device. High-risk (hrHPV) presence was determined with the SPF10-LiPA25 system and GP5+/6+ PCR. HrHPV-positive patients underwent gynecological examination. RESULTS: More than 90% of the patients rated their experience with the self-sample device as good to excellent, and 77% preferred self-sampling over a physician taken sample. Approximately thirty-five of 217 women tested hrHPV positive with SPF10- LiPA25, and 22 tested positive with the GP5+/6+ PCR. Eleven hrHPV-positive patients had clinically relevant gynecological abnormalities, and they all tested positive with GP5+/6+ PCR. CONCLUSIONS: Self-sampling is clinically applicable in a gynecological screening and is preferred by female RTRs. Therefore, self-sampling could be implemented with the aim to increase the participation rate of female RTRs in yearly gynecological screening.

Anogenital malignancies in women after renal transplantation over 40 years in a single center.

BACKGROUND: Renal transplant recipients have an increased risk to develop human papillomavirus (HPV)-related anogenital malignancies. A clinical overview of female anogenital posttransplantation malignancies and possible multifocal premalignancies over a period of 40 years renal transplantation is presented. Additionally, the genotype-specific prevalence of HPV in these (pre)malignancies was investigated. METHODS: Data of 1023 women, who underwent a renal transplantation between 1968 and 2008, were collected. Clinical data of all female renal transplant recipients who developed anogenital malignancies were retrospectively analyzed. The histology, cytology, and distribution of genotype-specific HPV infections were analyzed in all primary anogenital tumors and possible (multifocal) premalignancies. RESULTS: Sixteen anogenital malignancies (1.6%) were found: vulva (n=6), cervix (n=5), and anus (n=5). Twelve of 16 patients never had a cervical smear before transplantation. The median interval between transplantation and diagnosis of malignancy was 136 months (range, 16-288 months). High-risk HPV was detected in 91.7% of investigated lesions, HPV subtype 16 predominated (54.5%). Four of seven patients with two distinct anogenital lesions had different HPV types in the lesions. CONCLUSIONS: A high number of anogenital malignancies developed in our cohort, which are nearly all caused by HPV. Multifocal lesions within one patient frequently contained different high-risk HPV genotypes in both lesions. Our results underline the importance of anogenital screening and monitoring before and periodically after renal transplantation to prevent morbidity and mortality from anogenital malignancies.