Combination of weekly paclitaxel-carboplatin plus standard bevacizumab as neoadjuvant treatment in stage IB-IIB cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE: In this study we investigated response rates of bevacizumab in addition to weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin in neoadjuvant setting in cervical cancer stage IB-IIB. METHODS: In this retrospective study we included patients with FIGO 2018 stage IB-IIB cervical cancer. Treatment consisted of 9 weeks' neoadjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin (paclitaxel 60 mg/m2, carboplatin AUC 2.7; both weekly) and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks). The radiologic response rate was analyzed using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 criteria. The definition of optimal pathological response was complete disappearance of tumor (complete response, pCR) or residual disease with less than 3 mm stromal invasion (pPR1). Suboptimal pathologic response (pPR2) was defined as persistent residual disease with more than 3 mm stromal invasion. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were included. Six patients had FIGO 2018 stage IB1-IB2 (20%), one had stage IB3 (3%), five had stage IIA (17%), and 18 had stage IIB (60%). After completing the neoadjuvant chemotherapy, all patients showed a RECIST response (seven (23%) complete response; 23 (77%) partial response). Six patients (20%) were judged to be still inoperable. After radical hysterectomy, optimal pathological response was observed in 11 patients (38%) (pCR in nine patients (29%) and pPR1 in two patients (8%)). Six patients (20%) received postoperative adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Hematological toxicity was similar to neoadjuvant weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin, as we reported earlier. Grade IV proteinuria or hypertension was not observed and no administration of bevacizumab was delayed or dose-reduced. CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab in addition to weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin showed a 100% radiological RECIST response and an optimal pathological response of 38%. Although bevacizumab has an established role in the treatment of recurrent cervical cancer in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin, we did not observe a tendency toward superior effect on the pathological response rate of bevacizumab in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy setting.

Para-aortic lymph node surgical staging in locally-advanced cervical cancer: comparison between robotic versus conventional laparoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: With the expansion of the use of minimally invasive surgical techniques within the field of gynecological oncology, a robot assisted procedure seems to be an attractive technique for para-aortic lymph node sampling. The aim of this study was to compare robotic versus conventional laparoscopic para-aortic lymphadenectomy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS: In this monocentric retrospective study, we included patients with locally-advanced cervical cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IB2-IVA or IB1 with suspicious pelvic lymph nodes), who underwent a para-aortic lymphadenectomy up to the inferior mesenteric artery between December 1994 and December 2016 (robotic technique starting from December 2012). RESULTS: A total of 217 patients were included in the study (robotic, n=55 vs laparoscopic, n=162). When comparing conventional laparoscopic versus robotic para-aortic lymphadenectomy, the median age was 48 versus 49 years and the median body mass index was 24.4 vs 24.7 kg/m2, respectively. In the robotic or laparoscopic group, 85% and 83% were squamous carcinomas, respectively. Patients who underwent a robotic procedure had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (ASA2: 62% vs 56%, ASA3: 20% vs 2%, p<0.001), more prior major abdominal surgery (18% vs 6%, p=0.016), less estimated blood loss (median, 25 mL vs 62.5 mL, p<0.001), more para-aortic lymph nodes removed (11 vs 6, p<0.001), shorter postoperative stay (1.8 vs 2.3 days, p=0.002), and a higher, but non-significant, rate of metastatic para-aortic lymph nodes (13% vs 5%, p=0.065) compared with the laparoscopic procedure, respectively. There was no difference in complication rates between the two approaches. The most frequent complications were grade I and grade II according to the Clavien Dindo classification. No difference was observed in progression-free survival between robotic and laparoscopic para-aortic lymphadenectomy after 2 years (both groups 66%) (p=0.472). Also, 2 year overall survival was similar between the groups (77% vs 81% for robotic vs conventional laparoscopy group, respectively) (p=0.749). CONCLUSION: Robotic para-aortic lymphadenectomy in patients with locally-advanced cervical cancer resulted in better perioperative outcomes and similar survival outcomes when compared with a conventional laparoscopic approach.