ABO/Rh Blood Group and Cervical Cancer Survival: Results from Our Own and Other Studies.

Background: Cervical cancer is the most common genital cancer worldwide and is mainly caused by a persistent human papillomavirus infection. Well-known prognostic factors are age, histology, stage, stromal invasion, tumor size, and tumor grade. The relationship between the ABO and Rh system with cervical cancer has been studied since the 1950s, though without obtaining clear results. Here we investigated the association between the ABO blood group and Rh system and consecutively treated cervical cancer patients in our department. Methods: Clinical charts of cervical cancer patients treated and followed from 2010 to 2021 were checked for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Clinical and pathological data were recorded in a separate, anonymous, password-protected electronic database. All relevant data were extrapolated and used for final analysis. Results: A population of 143 cervical cancer patients was analyzed in this study. 47.6% (68/143) were blood group O, 36.4% (52/143) were blood group A, 8.4% (12/143) were blood group AB, and 7.7% (11/143) were blood group B. 14.9% (21/141) were RhD negative, while 85.1% (120/141) were RhD positive. No significant association was found between the ABO group and survival. However, patients with blood types B and AB had a higher BMI than the other blood types. RhD-negative patients exhibited a lower age at diagnosis (P=0.035) and had a higher overall survival compared to RhD-positive patients. Conclusions: The RhD factor appears to influence cervical cancer OS, but the data are too weakly significant to draw a definitive conclusion. Further studies with larger samples are needed to confirm this finding and to investigate the true impact of blood groups in female cancers.

Impact of 2 years of COVID-19 pandemic on ovarian cancer treatment in IRCCS-AUSL of Reggio Emilia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess compliance with the 2019 regional recommendation to centralize epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients and to assess whether the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the quality of care for EOC patients. METHODS: We compared data from EOC patients treated before the introduction of the 2019 regional recommendation (2018-2019) with data obtained from EOC patients treated after the regional recommendation was adopted during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021). Data were retrieved from the Optimal Ovarian Cancer Pathway records. R software version 4.1.2 (the R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) was used for the statistical analysis. RESULTS: 251 EOC patients were centralized. The number of EOC patients centralized increased from 2% to 49% despite the COVID-19 pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an increase in the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery. There was an improvement in the percentage of Stage III patients without gross residual disease following both primary and interval debulking surgery. The percentage of EOC cases discussed by the multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) increased from 66% to 89% of cases. CONCLUSION: Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, centralization has increased and the quality of care has been preserved thanks to the MTB.

The role of minimally invasive surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer treatment: a narrative review.

Objectives: The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the available evidence on the use of minimal invasive surgery (MIS) in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Background: MIS is currently performed to stage and treat EOC at different stage of presentation. We will evaluate risks and benefits of minimally invasive surgery for early stage EOC treatment, then potential advantages provided by staging laparoscopy in identifying patients suitable for primary cytoreductive surgery (PDS) will be discussed. Finally we will investigate the growing role of MIS in the treatment of advanced EOC after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and in the treatment of EOC recurrence. Methods: An electronic database search was performed on PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar for relevant studies up to December 2022. Conclusion: LPS represents a feasible surgical procedure for the staging and treatment in early, advanced and EOC relapse in selected patients treated in high-volume oncological centers by surgeons with adequate experience in advanced surgical procedures. Despite the increasing use of MIS over the last few years, randomized clinical trials are still needed to prove its effectiveness.

Should Endometrial Cancer Treatment Be Centralized?

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common malignancy of the female genital tract in Western and emerging countries. In 2012, new cancer cases numbered 319,605, and 76,160 cancer deaths were diagnosed worldwide. ECs are usually diagnosed after menopause; 70% of ECs are diagnosed at an early stage with a favorable prognosis and a 5-year overall survival rate of 77%. On the contrary, women with advanced or recurrent disease have extremely poor outcomes because they show a low response rate to conventional chemotherapy. EC is generally considered easy to treat, although it presents a 5-year mortality of 25%. Though the guidelines (GLs) recommend treatment in specialized centers by physicians specializing in gynecologic oncology, most women are managed by general gynecologists, resulting in differences and discrepancies in clinical management. In this paper we reviewed the literature with the aim of highlighting where the treatment of EC patients requires gynecologic oncologists, as suggested by the GLs. Moreover, we sought to identify the causes of the lack of GL adherence, suggesting useful changes to ensure adequate treatment for all EC patients.

Relation of folates, vitamin B12 and homocysteine to vertebral bone mineral density change in postmenopausal women. A five-year longitudinal evaluation.

Elevation of homocysteine is associated with an increased risk for bone fractures. Whether the risk is due to homocysteine or to the reduced levels of cofactors necessary for its metabolisation, such as folates or vitamin B12, is not completely clear. In this study we wanted to determine whether in postmenopausal women, levels of folates, homocysteine or vitamin B12 are predictive of the rate of vertebral bone mineral density (BMD) change. The study was conducted at the centre for the menopause of our university hospital. Between September 2001 and March 2002, 161 healthy postmenopausal women volunteered for a cross-sectional evaluation of BMD and levels of serum folates, homocysteine and vitamin B12. Women were recalled for a second evaluation of vertebral BMD after about 5 years. Women having used anti-resorptive therapies for more than 1 year were excluded. The analysis was possible in 117 postmenopausal women. The annual rate of vertebral BMD change was independently related to levels of folates (coefficient of regression (CR): 2.040; 95%CI: 0.483, 3.596; p=0.011), and initial BMD values (CR: -0.060; 95%CI: -0.117, -0.003; p=0.040). No significant relation was found between the change of vertebral BMD and homocysteine or vitamin B12. BMD values at the first (r=0.225; p=0.016) and the second (r=0.206; p=0.027) evaluation were related to levels of folates, but not of homocysteine or of vitamin B12. These data suggest an important role for folates deficiency in the vertebral BMD decline of postmenopausal women.

Menopause, estrogens, progestins, or their combination on body weight and anthropometric measures.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate modification in body weight and anthropometric indexes in women at the time of menopause. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study. SETTING: Menopause Center at the University Hospital of Modena. PATIENT(S): Women in perimenopause (n = 87), ovariectomized (n = 60), and in postmenopause (n = 182) without and with treatment. INTERVENTION(S): Data were retrieved from the electronic database of the Menopause Center. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Modification of weight, body mass index (BMI), waist, hip, and waist-to-hip ratio in 12 months. RESULT(S): Body weight increased in perimenopausal (0.6 +/- 0.1 kg) women, did not vary in postmenopausal (0.2 +/- 0.1 kg) women, and decreased in ovariectomized (-0.5 +/- 0.3 kg) women. Waist increased significantly in perimenopausal (2.3 +/- 0.4 cm) and in postmenopausal (2.0 +/- 0.4 cm) women. In comparison to no treatment, progestin administration (n = 29) decreased body weight (-0.2 +/- 0.5 kg) and hip (-1.1 +/- 0.9 cm) in perimenopausal women, estrogen (E) administration (n = 38) increased body weight (0.8 +/- 0.3 kg) in ovariectomized women, whereas E plus progestin administration (n = 89) did not induce any modification in postmenopausal women. CONCLUSION(S): Present preliminary data indicate that body weight increases in perimenopausal women, decreases in ovariectomized women, and does not increase significantly in naturally postmenopausal women. Estrogens and progestins influence body weight differently, increasing and decreasing it, respectively.