Medical cannabis and its effect on oncological outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer treated with PARP inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) play a pivotal role in ovarian cancer management. With medical cannabis emerging as a novel component of supportive care, this study investigated the impact of medical cannabis use on oncological outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer undergoing PARPi therapy. METHODS: The study included patients from a single institution database treated for ovarian cancer between January 2014 and January 2020 who received PARPi maintenance therapy in a first-line or recurrent disease setting after a confirmed response to platinum-based treatment. The study categorized patients as cannabis users and cannabis-naïve. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to assess the effects of medical cannabis use on the duration of PARPi therapy, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Among the eligible patients (n=93), most were cannabis-naïve (69%, n=64) while the rest used medical cannabis (31%, n=29). Medical cannabis use rates were comparable for patients receiving PARPi therapy post-primary treatment or for recurrence (42%, n=9, vs 27%, n=20; p=0.1). Both groups exhibited similar median duration for PARPi therapy (12.1 vs 9.5 months; p=0.89) and progression-free survival (20 vs 21 months; p=0.83). Kaplan-Meier analysis detected no differences in progression-free survival associated with cannabis use. Although cannabis users had an extended overall survival compared with the cannabis-naïve group (129.3 vs 99 months; p=0.03), cannabis use was insignificant for overall survival on multivariate analysis (p=0.10). Multivariate analysis showed stage IV at diagnosis (p=0.02) to be the sole factor associated with progression-free survival (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Medical cannabis usage in patients receiving PARPi treatment showed no association with duration of PARPi therapy, progression-free survival, or overall survival.

Health-related quality of life metrics as endpoints in surgical trials: hype or hope?

The management of gynecological cancer has evolved considerably over the past decades in almost every field of treatment. Surgery plays a major role in the treatment algorithm. However, these invasive interventions can have profound implications for the quality of life (QoL) of affected individuals. The routine implementation of QoL measurements in clinical trials has become common, reflecting a new research 'standard', despite the fact that all available QoL instruments were not designed nor validated prospectively for surgical trials. This review seeks to address whether patient reported outcomes and QoL measurements rightfully take center stage in current surgical trials, leading to direct implementation for the benefit of patient care, or are they simply more of a researcher's hope. We will also provide an 'action plan' to better implement QoL measurements in future surgical trials.

Financial toxicity in gynecologic oncology: a multi-practice survey.

BACKGROUND: Financial toxicity is associated with worse cancer outcomes, including lower survival. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the prevalence of, and patient risk factors for, financial toxicity among gynecologic oncology patients in a multi-site health system. METHODS: We identified patients seen in University of Pennsylvania gynecologic oncology practices between January 2020 and February 2022 with a patient portal account. We sent a survey to all alive patients twice between March and April 2022, including the 11-item Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool. We compared differences between patients reporting high (COST score <26) and low financial toxicity (COST score ≥26) in Χ2 and regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 8239 patients, 6925 had a portal account, and 498 completed the survey for 7.2% response rate. 44% had a COST score <26, indicating financial toxicity. Patients with high financial toxicity were more likely to be younger (mean age 54 vs 60), have cervical cancer (10% vs 4%; p=0.008), be privately insured (71% vs 57%; p=0.003) or have Medicaid (7% vs 3%; p=0.03), or be unemployed (18% vs 3%; p=<0.001), and less likely to be white (79% vs 90%, p=0.003) than those with low financial toxicity. Patients with Medicare were less likely to experience financial toxicity than privately insured patients (RR=0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.95). CONCLUSION: In this study of patients with gynecologic cancer or pre-cancer, 44% had financial toxicity. Financial toxicity was higher in patients who were younger, did not identify as White, and had private insurance. Targeted measures to address financial toxicity are needed to minimize disparities in patient burden of cancer treatment.

Evidence and best practices for trauma-informed care in gynecologic oncology patients.

Diagnosing, treating, and managing gynecologic cancer can lead to significant physical and emotional stress, which may have lasting effects on a patient's overall health and quality of life. The physical symptoms of gynecologic cancer, such as pain, discomfort, and loss of function, may also contribute to emotional distress and anxiety. Further, the diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of gynecologic cancer may be traumatic due to the need for invasive exams and procedures, especially in women with a history of sexual assault or other traumatic experiences.Women with gynecologic cancer may experience various emotional and psychological symptoms, including anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and fear of recurrence. Trauma-informed care is an approach to healthcare that emphasizes the recognition and response to the impact of trauma on a patient's life. Further, trauma-informed care acknowledges that prior traumatic experiences may affect a patient's mental and physical health and that the healthcare system may unintentionally re-traumatize patients.Implementation of trauma-informed care can improve patient outcomes, increase patient satisfaction with care, and reduce the risk of re-traumatization during cancer treatment and follow-up care. Therefore, gynecologic oncology providers should become familiar with the principles and practices of trauma-informed care and implement trauma-informed screening tools to identify patients who may benefit from additional support or referrals to mental health services. This review will explore the importance of trauma-informed care in patients with gynecologic cancer and its impact on outcomes. Further, we discuss principles and evidence-based practices of trauma-informed care and strategies to implement trauma-informed screening tools to identify patients who may benefit from additional support or referrals to mental health services.

Role of V-Y flap reconstruction in vulvar cancer patients: multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess if the use of a V-Y reconstructive flap after excisional radical surgery positively influences the surgical outcomes in patients with vulvar cancer. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective, controlled study. Surgical outcomes and complication rates of women with invasive vulvar cancer who underwent radical surgery and vulvar reconstruction and those who underwent radical surgery without the reconstruction step were compared. Only patients who underwent bilateral or unilateral V-Y advancement fascio-cutaneous flaps were included in the reconstruction group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to analyze predicting variables for their association with complication rates. RESULTS: Overall, 361 patients were included: 190 (52%) underwent the reconstructive step after the excisional radical procedure and were compared with 171 (47.4%) who did not undergo the reconstructive step. At multivariate analysis, body mass index >30 kg/m2 (odds ratio (OR) 3.36, p=0.007) and diabetes (OR 2.62, p<0.022) were independently correlated with wound infection. Moreover, increasing age (OR 1.52, p=0.009), body mass index >30 kg/m2 (OR 3.21, p=0.002,) and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages III-IV (OR 2.25, p=0.017) were independent predictors of wound dehiscence. A significant reduction in the incidence of postoperative wound complications among patients who underwent V-Y reconstructive flaps was demonstrated. This was correlated more significantly in women with lesions >4 cm. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of V-Y flaps in vulvar surgery was correlated with reduced surgical related complications, particularly in vulnerable patients involving large surgical defects following excisional radical procedures.

MIRRORS: a prospective cohort study assessing the feasibility of robotic interval debulking surgery for advanced-stage ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the feasibility and safety of robotic interval debulking surgery following the MIRRORS protocol (robot-assisted laparoscopic assessment prior to robotic or open surgery) in women with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. MIRRORS is the first of three planned trials: MIRRORS, MIRRORS-RCT (pilot), and MIRRORS-RCT. METHODS: The participants were patients with stage IIIc-IVb epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, suitable for interval debulking surgery with a pelvic mass ≤8 cm. The intervention was robot-assisted laparoscopic assessment prior to robotic or open interval debulking surgery (MIRRORS protocol). The primary outcome was feasibility of recruitment, and the secondary outcomes were quality of life (EORTC QLQC30/OV28, HADS questionnaires), pain, surgical complications, complete cytoreduction rate (%), conversion to open surgery (%), and overall and progression-free survival at 1 year. RESULTS: Overall, 95.8% (23/24) of patients who were eligible were recruited. Median age was 68 years (range 53-83). All patients had high grade serous histology and were BRCA negative. In total, 56.5% were stage IV, 43.5% were stage III, 87.0% had a partial response, while 13.0% had stable disease by RECIST 1.1. Median peritoneal cancer index was 24 (range 6-38). Following MIRRORS protocol, 87.0% (20/23) underwent robotic interval debulking surgery, and 13.0% (3/23) had open surgery. All patients achieved R<1 (robotic R0=47.4%, open R0=0%). No patients had conversion to open. Median estimated blood loss was 50 mL for robotic (range 20-500 mL), 2026 mL for open (range 2000-2800 mL) (p=0.001). Median intensive care length of stay was 0 days for robotic (range 0-8) and 3 days (range 3-13) for MIRRORS Open (p=0.012). The median length of stay was 1.5 days for robotic (range 1-17), 6 days for open (range 5-41) (p=0.012). The time to chemotherapy was as follows 18.5 days for robotic (range 13-28), 25 days for open (range 22-28) (p=0.139). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic interval debulking surgery appears safe and feasible for experienced robotic surgeons in patients with a pelvic mass ≤8 cm. A randomized controlled trial (MIRRORS-RCT) will determine whether MIRRORS protocol has non-inferior survival (overall and progression-free) compared with open interval debulking surgery.

Acupuncture and integrative oncology for taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy: a randomized multicentered study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of acupuncture alone or with additional integrative oncology modalities for taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy-related symptoms in patients with gynecological and breast cancer. METHODS: The study was a prospective evaluation of patients undergoing twice-weekly treatments with either acupuncture alone (single-modality, group A) or with additional manual-movement and mind-body therapies (multimodality, group B), for 6 weeks. Symptom severity was assessed at baseline, 6 weeks, and 9 weeks using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Taxane (FACT-Tax) tool; and von Frey perception thresholds. Additional symptoms were also assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW) study tool. RESULTS: For the 120 participants (60 in each study arm), baseline to 6-week scores were similar in both groups for improved FACT-Tax physical wellbeing and scores for hand numbness/tingling; EORTC physical functioning and global health status; and MYCaW scores. FACT-Tax taxane subscales and scores for foot numbness/tingling improved only in group A (p=0.038), while emotional wellbeing FACT-Tax (p=0.02) and EORTC pain (p=0.005) improved only in group B. Group B showed greater improvement for FACT-Tax neuropathy-related concerns than group A at 24 hours (p=0.043) and 7 days (p=0.009) after the first treatment. CONCLUSION: Acupuncture alone or with additional integrative oncology modalities may help reduce neuropathy-related symptoms. The single-modality group demonstrated greater improvement for foot numbness/tingling, and the multimodality group demonstrated improvement for pain and improved emotional wellbeing and neuropathy-related concerns in the first week of treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03290976.

Side effects screening and early intervention to impact in quality of life of patients with gynecological cancers (HALIS study).

BACKGROUND: Advances in the treatment of gynecological cancers have led to increased survival in patients with gynecological cancers. Nevertheless, patients may still experience prevalent long term consequences, including lower limb lymphedema, depression, anxiety, sexual dysfunction, malnutrition, and sarcopenia, that negatively impact their quality of life. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact on self-perceived quality of life of systematic screening and early treatment of lower limb lymphedema, anxiety and depression, sexual dysfunction, and sarcopenia and malnutrition compared with standard practice. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: Systematic screening with validated questionnaires leading to early diagnosis and treatment of side effects will have a positive impact on quality of life. TRIAL DESIGN: This prospective clinical trial will randomize candidates for surgery to either standard of care or systematic screening every 2 months for 2 years. Quality of life data will be collected every 4 months. After randomization, patients in the control group will follow standard usual care. Their screening scales will not be considered. In the experimental group, positive screenings will generate an alert to the physician, and patients will be referred to the corresponding specific area (rehabilitation unit, psycho-oncology unit, sexual health unit, or nutrition unit). MAJOR INCLUSION AND XCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients aged ≥18 years with ovarian, cervical, or endometrial cancer who are candidates for surgery will be included. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: Self-reported quality of life questionnaire score. SAMPLE SIZE: 168 patients will be randomized to detect a difference of 6 points in the questionnaires. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Study completion is estimated for January 2026 and the results will be presented in May 2026. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05918770.

A randomized patient education trial investigating treatment-related distress and satisfaction with the use of an at-home gynecologic brachytherapy educational video.

BACKGROUND: Physician explanation of gynecologic brachytherapy can be overwhelming or induce patient anxiety, and may be time-constrained given clinical limitations. We report the first randomized trial of an educational video intervention in gynecologic brachytherapy on patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: Between February 2020 and January 2022, 80 gynecologic cancer patients prescribed brachytherapy were randomly assigned to either standard informed consent (Arm A) or a supplemental 16 min brachytherapy educational video (https://vimeo.com/403385455/d0716e3cc8) via the internet (Arm B). Primary outcome was treatment-related distress (National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) distress scale scored 0 (no distress) to 10 (maximum distress)). Secondary outcome was patient satisfaction (summated Likert-scale scored 11-55). Surveys were administered at baseline, after first treatment, and prior to brachytherapy completion. RESULTS: All patients completed the prescribed brachytherapy. In Arm B, 19/40 (48%) patients and 10/40 (25%) patients' family/friends viewed the video. For patients that completed all surveys (Arm A n=29, Arm B n=28), there was no difference between arms in the sociodemographic, clinical, or treatment variables. Distress scores were low at baseline (Arm A median 4, Arm B median 4, p=0.65) and there was no detectable change in distress between arms on surveys 1 and 2 (ß 0.36, p=0.67) or surveys 1 and 3 (ß -1.02, p=0.29) in multivariable analysis. Satisfaction scores were high at baseline (Arm A median 54, Arm B median 54.5, p=0.64) and there was no detectable change in satisfaction between arms on surveys 1 and 2 (ß 0.22, p=0.93) or surveys 1 and 3 (ß 0.63, p=0.85) in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients randomized to an educational video tool for gynecologic brachytherapy, approximately 50% of the cohort and 25% of the cohort's family/friends used the video. Overall, patients had low distress scores and high satisfaction scores with no significant differences between the standard and video intervention arms. Further work is needed to understand factors contributing to gynecologic brachytherapy anxiety. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04363957.

Impact of gynecological cancers on health-related quality of life: historical context, measurement instruments, and current knowledge.

Gynecologic cancers, comprising 14.4% of newly diagnosed cancer cases in women globally, are substantial causes of both mortality and morbidity, with a profound impact on the quality of life (QoL) of survivors. Over the past few decades, advancements in interdisciplinary and interprofessional care have contributed to an increase in the average life expectancy of gynecological cancer patients. However, the disease and its treatments have a profound impact on patients, leading to physical changes and psychological consequences, including psychosocial and psychosexual effects, which negatively affect their QoL.The primary objective of management strategies is to minimize harm while improving survival rates and enhancing QoL during the survivorship stage. QoL measures play a crucial role in enhancing our comprehension of how cancer and its treatments affect individuals. Consequently, various measurement instruments, such as the EORTC QLQ 30, PROMIS-29, FACT-G, and QOL-CS, have been developed to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Pre- and post-treatment HRQoL measurements have been shown to be predictive factors for post-operative complications and prognostic factors for overall survival and progression-free survival in gynecological oncology patients. Patient-reported outcomes related to HRQoL are essential tools for measuring patient outcomes and enabling patient-centered clinical decision-making.This article focuses on HRQoL, providing a historical context, summarizing measurement instruments, and discussing the current understanding of the impact of gynecological cancers on HRQoL.

How to break bad news and how to learn this skill: results from an international North-Eastern German Society for Gynecological Oncology (NOGGO) survey among physicians and medical students with 1089 participants

BACKGROUND: Delivering bad news to patients is one of the most challenging tasks in medical practice. Despite its great relevance to patients, relatives, and medical staff, there is a paucity of data pertaining to training, experience, expectations, and preferences of physicians and medical students on breaking bad news. METHODS: We conducted an international survey in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria using an online questionnaire among physicians and medical students. RESULTS: A total of 786 physicians and 303 medical students completed the survey. Physicians stated that 32.7% deliver bad news several times a week and 45.2% several times a month. Difficulties controlling their emotions (35.1%) and remaining professional (43.4%) were the greatest challenges for physicians. Delivering bad news is associated with feelings of anxiety, both among experienced physicians (median of 3.8 out of 10.0) and medical students (median of 5.3). Conveying bad news is a burden to physicians and consequently has a substantial impact on their job satisfaction. All participants reported the need for more communication training concerning this subject. Only 49.5% of medical students and 67.3% of physicians mentioned having learned adequate communication skills. Our data demonstrate that communication training decreases the level of anxiety and increases the feeling of self-confidence towards breaking bad news. Preferred educational tools were seminars with simulation (students: 71.4%, physicians: 49.5%), observing more senior faculty (students: 57.4%, physicians: 55.1%), and supervision and feedback sessions (students: 36.3%, physicians: 45.7%). The largest barriers regarding education on communication were limited time (students: 77.0%, physicians: 74.9%) and missing awareness of supervisors (students: 60.6%, physicians: 41.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed a great need for systematic training and education in breaking bad news among physicians and medical students. Hospitals, medical schools, and postgraduate training programs are strongly encouraged to fill this gap, and improve sustainable doctor-patient communication to overcome the psychological burden for physicians.

Dose-dense neoadjuvant chemotherapy before radical surgery in cervical cancer: a retrospective cohort study and systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of dose-dense neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical hysterectomy in reducing adjuvant radiotherapy in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stage IB1-IB2/IIA1 cervical cancer with disrupted stromal ring and as an alternative to concurrent chemoradiotherapy in FIGO 2018 stages IB3/IIA2. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study including patients with FIGO 2018 stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer undergoing dose-dense neoadjuvant chemotherapy at the European Institute of Oncology in Milan, Italy between July 2014 and December 2022. Weekly carboplatin (AUC2 or AUC2.7) plus paclitaxel (80 or 60 mg/m2, respectively) was administered for six to nine cycles. Radiological response was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) v1.1 criteria. The optimal pathological response was defined as residual tumor ≤3 mm. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate survival rates. A systematic literature review on dose-dense neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery for cervical cancer was also performed. RESULTS: A total of 63 patients with a median age of 42.8 years (IQR 35.3-47.9) were included: 39.7% stage IB-IB2/IIA1 and 60.3% stage IB3/IIA2. The radiological response was as follows: 81% objective response rate (17.5% complete and 63.5% partial), 17.5% stable disease, and 1.6% progressive disease. The operability rate was 92.1%. The optimal pathological response rate was 27.6%. Adjuvant radiotherapy was administered in 25.8% of cases. The median follow-up for patients who underwent radical hysterectomy was 49.7 months (IQR 16.8-67.7). The 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival were 79% (95% CI 0.63 to 0.88) and 92% (95% CI 0.80 to 0.97), respectively. Fifteen studies including 697 patients met the eligibility criteria for the systematic review. The objective response rate, operability rate, and adjuvant radiotherapy rate across studies ranged between 52.6% and 100%, 64% and 100%, and 4% and 70.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Dose-dense neoadjuvant chemotherapy before radical surgery could be a valid strategy to avoid radiotherapy in stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer, especially in young patients desiring to preserve overall quality of life. Prospective research is warranted to provide robust, high-quality evidence.

Quality of life in patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Current evidence has shown how laparoscopic surgery results in shorter hospital stay, faster recovery, and better aesthetic results. However, we do not have information on populations in Latin America and the impact that the social environment has on quality of life in patients with gynecological cancer undergoing minimally invasive surgery. To assess quality of life of patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery in a gynecologic oncology department over time and to establish the relationship with patient and treatment variables. METHODS: This cross-sectional study evaluated the quality of life of women undergoing minimally invasive surgery from August 2019 to July 2021. The FACT-G (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General) scale encompasses global quality of life and four domains of physical, social, emotional, and functional components. This scale was applied to measure quality of life in the preoperative, early operative, and late postoperative periods. Additionally, mixed models were used to compare quality of life based on demographic and clinical factors after minimally invasive surgery. RESULTS: A total of 158 patients were analyzed. Belonging to a higher socioeconomic stratum (3 vs 1) had a positive impact on the global quality of life in patients undergoing surgery with an increase of 7.6 points (p=0.011). Also, a lower Charlson Index had a positive impact of 0.393 points for the physical component of quality of life (p=0.031). For the social component of quality of life, having a partner and being part of a higher socioeconomic stratum (3 and 2 vs 1) resulted in an increase of 2.11 (p=0.005), 4.06 (p<0.05), and 2.55 (p=0.004) points, respectively. Belonging to a higher socioeconomic stratum (3 vs 1) resulted in an increase of 2.03 points (p=0.031) for the functional component of quality of life. Finally, the complexity of the procedure, or whether the procedure was ambulatory or not did not impact quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Lower Charlson Index, having a partner, or having higher socioeconomic status are all associated with higher quality of life of patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery.

Black and hispanic women have less support during cancer evaluation and treatment: results from a prospective patient reported outcomes program in gynecologic malignancy.

OBJECTIVE: Race remains a significant predictor of poor outcomes in women with gynecologic cancer and minority patients consistently report worse quality of life during cancer treatment. Disparities between patients in strength of social and emotional supports may contribute to these outcomes. This study's objective was to describe the racial differences in patient reported outcomes of women being evaluated or treated for a gynecologic malignancy at a large tertiary cancer hospital. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, all patients presenting for care at a tertiary care gynecologic oncology clinic between January 2018 and September 2019 were evaluated for inclusion. All patients were administered validated patient reported outcome measure questionnaires at serial visits. Demographic data was gathered including self-reported race. Patients were characterized as White, Black, Asian, Hispanic/Latino, or Other. Patient reported outcomes were compared between respondents of different races using linear and logistic regression. RESULTS: Between January 2018 to September 2019, 2022 patients with a known race completed questionnaires. Of these patients, 86.7% were White, 4.3% Black, and 4.9% Hispanic/Latino and 58.7% had a known cancer diagnosis. Non-White patients were significantly less likely to complete questionnaires (p<0.001). Non-White patients reported significantly lower levels of emotional support on all questions (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) emotional support: Q1 p<0.001, Q2 p<0.001, Q3 p=0.013, Q4 p=0.002), and lower overall emotional (p=0.005) and instrumental (p=0.005) support scores when compared with White patients. Hispanic/Latino patients reported the lowest levels of emotional and instrumental support and more cognitive (p=0.043) and financial (p=0.040) difficulties associated with treatment. Black women reported having less support with chores while sick (p=0.014) and being less likely to have someone to talk to (p=0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences exist in patient reported outcomes between women of different racial backgrounds. Hispanic/Latino and Black women have less support during gynecologic cancer evaluation and treatment as compared with White women.

Can the Tilburg Frailty Indicator predict post-operative quality of recovery in patients with gynecologic cancer? A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Frailty is a marker of physiologic decline within multiple organ systems. The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) is an instrument for assessing frailty. We evaluated the ability of the TFI to predict the quality of post-operative recovery in patients with gynecologic cancer and explored the associations between frailty, post-operative complications, and length of stay. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of patients scheduled for radical gynecologic cancer surgery between May 2021 and January 2022, and defined a TFI score ≥5 as 'frailty'. Our primary outcome was the post-operative quality of recovery based on the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15), and the secondary outcomes were post-operative complications and length of stay. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between frailty and outcomes. We developed receiver operating characteristics (ROCs) and assessed areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) to explore the ability of frailty to predict the quality of post-operative recovery. RESULTS: A total of 169 patients were included. The prevalence of frailty using the TFI was 47.9% in this cohort. In the multivariate regression analysis, frailty emerged as a significant predictor of the 3-day QoR-15 score (aOR 11.69, 95% CI 4.26 to 32.08; p˂0.001) and complications (aOR 10.05, 95% CI 1.66 to 60.72; p=0.012). Frailty was not associated with length of stay (aOR 2.12, 95% CI 0.87 to 5.16; p=0.099). The combination of the TFI, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, and types of cancer resulted in an increase in the AUC compared with the TFI alone (AUC 0.796, 95% CI 0.727 to 0.865; p˂0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the TFI may assist surgeons in estimating the risk with respect to post-operative quality of recovery and complications in patients with gynecologic cancer. Combining the TFI with ASA classification and cancer type is expected to improve the predictive ability of poor quality of recovery.

A longitudinal study of sexual health and quality of life in endometrial carcinoma survivors.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess sexual health and quality of life (QoL) in endometrial cancer survivors and the factors influencing these variables. METHODS: A mixed method design comprising quantitative (cohort design) and qualitative (face-to-face interviews) aspects was chosen. A total of 132 patients who underwent surgery alone, surgery followed by adjuvant vaginal brachytherapy, or surgery followed by chemotherapy and radiation were included. Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General (FACT-G) questionnaires were used to assess the participants' sexual health and QoL at 6 months and 1 year post-treatment. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to analyze the factors associated with general and sexual well-being. RESULTS: At 1 year, 89% of the participants still had low sexual function scores. Survivors over 50 years (OR 284.7, 95% CI 13 to 364, p<0.001) and educated below graduate level (OR 26.8, 95% CI 2 to 370, p=0.014) had low sexual function scores. Patients who had surgery alone had better QoL than those who received adjuvant radiation. Women who had surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation had the lowest QoL scores (OR 6.4, 95% CI 2.1 to 19.5, p=0.001). All scores improved with time. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the high prevalence of low sexual function and poor QoL in endometrial cancer survivors. There was a communication gap between the women and their partners as well as their healthcare providers. This study highlights the need for discussion about the survivors' sexual well-being and QoL.

Outcomes and endpoints of relevance in gynecologic cancer clinical trials.

Drug development is paramount to improve outcomes in patients with gynecologic cancers. A randomized clinical trial should measure whether a clinically relevant improvement is detected with the new intervention compared with the standard of care, using reproductible and appropriate endpoints. Clinically meaningful improvements in overall survival and/or quality of life (QoL) are the gold standards to measure benefit of new therapeutic strategies. Alternative endpoints, such as progression-free survival, provide an earlier measure of the effect of the new therapeutic drug, and are not confounded by the effect of subsequent lines of therapy. Yet, its surrogacy with improved overall survival or QoL is unclear in gynecologic malignancies. Of relevance to studies assessing maintenance strategies are other time-to-event endpoints, such as progression-free survival two and time to second subsequent treatment, which provide valuable information on the disease control in the longer term. Translational and biomarker studies are increasingly being incorporated into gynecologic oncology clinical trials, as they may allow understanding of the biology of the disease, resistance mechanisms, and enable a better selection of patients who might benefit from the new therapeutic strategy. Globally, the endpoint selection of a clinical trial will differ according to the type of study, population, disease setting, and type of therapeutic strategy. This review provides an overview of primary and secondary endpoint selection of relevance for gynecologic oncology clinical trials.

Systemic therapy de-escalation in advanced ovarian cancer: a new era on the horizon?

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have sculpted the current landscape of advanced ovarian cancer treatment. With the advent of targeted maintenance therapies, improved survival rates have led to a timely interest in exploring de-intensified strategies with the goal of improving quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes. The emerging concept of systemic treatment de-escalation would represent a new frontier in personalizing therapy in ovarian cancer. PARPi are so effective that properly selected patients treated with these agents might require less chemotherapy to achieve the same oncologic outcomes. The fundamental key is to limit de-escalation to a narrow subpopulation with favorable prognostic factors, such as patients with BRCA-mutated and/or homologous recombination-deficient tumors without macroscopic residual disease after surgery or other high-risk clinical factors. Potential de-escalation strategies include shifting PARPi in the neoadjuvant setting, de-escalating adjuvant chemotherapy after primary debulking surgery, reducing PARPi maintenance therapy duration, starting PARPi directly after interval debulking surgery, omitting maintenance therapy, and continuing PARPi beyond oligoprogression (if combined with locoregional treatment). Several ongoing trials are currently investigating the feasibility and safety of de-escalating approaches in ovarian cancer and the results are eagerly awaited. This review aims to discuss the current trends, drawbacks, and future perspectives regarding systemic treatment de-escalation in advanced ovarian cancer.

Does sentinel node mapping impact morbidity and quality of life in endometrial cancer?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prevalence of post-operative complications and quality of life (QoL) related to sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy vs systematic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer. METHODS: A prospective cohort included women with early-stage endometrial carcinoma who underwent lymph node staging, grouped as follows: SLN group (sentinel lymph node only) and SLN+LND group (sentinel lymph node biopsy with addition of systematic lymphadenectomy). The patients had at least 12 months of follow-up, and QoL was assessed by European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cervical Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30) and EORTC-QLQ-Cx24. Lymphedema was also assessed by clinical evaluation and perimetry. RESULTS: 152 patients were included: 113 (74.3%) in the SLN group and 39 (25.7%) in the SLN+LND group. Intra-operative surgical complications occurred in 2 (1.3%) cases, and all belonged to SLN+LND group. Patients undergoing SLN+LND had higher overall complication rates than those undergoing SLN alone (33.3% vs 14.2%; p=0.011), even after adjusting for confound factors (OR=3.45, 95% CI 1.40 to 8.47; p=0.007). The SLN+LND group had longer surgical time (p=0.001) and need for admission to the intensive care unit (p=0.001). Moreover, the incidence of lymphocele was found in eight cases in the SLN+LND group (0 vs 20.5%; p<0.001). There were no differences in lymphedema rate after clinical evaluation and perimetry. However, the lymphedema score was highest when lymphedema was reported by clinical examination at 6 months (30.1 vs 7.8; p<0.001) and at 12 months (36.3 vs 6.0; p<0.001). Regarding the overall assessment of QoL, there was no difference between groups at 12 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: There was a higher overall rate of complications for the group undergoing systematic lymphadenectomy, as well as higher rates of lymphocele and lymphedema according to the symptom score. No difference was found in overall QoL between SLN and SLN+LND groups.

Patient-reported nausea after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for gynae-oncology patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to analyze the adherence to strategies to prevent post-operative nausea and vomiting after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for gynae-oncology patients. Patient-reported nausea before and after ERAS was also studied. METHODS: This prospective observational study included all patients undergoing laparotomy for a suspicious pelvic mass or confirmed advanced ovarian cancer before (pre-ERAS) and after the implementation of ERAS (post-ERAS) at Oslo University Hospital, Norway. Patients were a priori stratified according to the planned extent of surgery into two cohorts (Cohort 1: Surgery of advanced disease; Cohort 2: Surgery for a suspicious pelvic tumor). Clinical data including baseline characteristics and outcome data were prospectively collected. RESULTS: A total of 439 patients were included, 243 pre-ERAS and 196 post-ERAS. At baseline, 27% of the patients reported any grade of nausea. In the post-ERAS cohort, statistically significantly more patients received double post-operative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis (64% pre-ERAS vs 84% post-ERAS, p<0.0001). There was no difference in the need for rescue medication (82% pre-ERAS vs 79% post-ERAS; p=0.17) and no statistically significant difference between pre- and post-ERAS or between the surgical cohorts in patient-reported nausea of any grade on day 2. Patients who reported none/mild nausea on day 2 had significantly less peri-operative fluid administered during surgery than those who reported moderate or severe nausea (median 12.5 mL/kg/hour vs 16.5 mL/kg/hour, p=0.045) but, in multivariable analysis, fluid management did not remain significantly associated with nausea. CONCLUSION: Implementation of an ERAS protocol increased the adherence to post-operative nausea and vomiting prevention guidelines. Nausea, both before and after laparotomy, remains an unmet clinical need of gynae-oncology patients also in an ERAS program. Patient-reported outcome measures warrant further investigation in the evaluation of ERAS.