Carcinoma of the cervix is today definitely a radiation problem, but few cases being treated by radical surgery as originally developed by Werthheim. Irradiation has shown excellent results, consistently better than those obtained surgically, so that it is today the method of choice. Quite different is the situation with regard to treatment of cancer of the body of the uterus. Except in advanced cases, surgical treatment has long been considered the method of preference for cancer of the uterine corpus. The ready accessibility of the uterus to surgical approach, its thick muscular structure, the slow extension of the disease to the surrounding parts, and the infrequency of early metastatic involvement have all served to make surgery the first choice in the treatment of this condition. Meigs (1) says: “The treatment of carcinoma of the body of the uterus is quite definite, total hysterectomy,” and this is a dictum that has been followed in most clinics up to the present time. Carcinoma of the uterus appears most commonly after the menopause, when patients are still well able to stand radical operation. One of the factors militating against irradiation in these cases was the inability of the early radiologist to secure a cancericidal dose sufficient to destroy the whole lesion. The faulty technic formerly employed in applying radium within the uterus often left many areas unaffected while other parts were actively destroyed. Recurrence was frequent, although both patient and doctor had been lured by the absence of symptoms into the erroneous impression that a cure had been effected. It is true, as Meigs states, that radium therapy in the body of the uterus is something of a blind affair, and that it falls short of the ideal treatment for uterine cancer, for, as Fricke (2) has said, one is trying to destroy a hidden cancer in an enclosed cavity. Even so, good results have been achieved by irradiation. Another objection advanced against the use of radiation therapy is found in the prevalent belief that only certain types of malignant tissue respond to radiation. It was thought that cancers of histologic grades I and II were particularly radio-resistant and that hysterectomy was therefore the only proper treatment. In 1930 Healy and Cutler, quoted by Healy (3), showed that not all adenocarcinomas of the uterus are of the same cellular structure, and that varying degrees of malignancy and radiosensitivity are encountered. In Healy's opinion a histologic diagnosis of grade I or II at the time of curettage justified immediate hysterectomy without preliminary roentgen or radium irradiation. But Healy and Brown (4) state that “under radiation therapy the degree of malignancy as determined histologically does not appear to be as important a factor in prognosis as it is when surgery alone is the method of treatment.”