Stage IA2 Cervical Cancer Research Articles

Trends in Use and Effect on Survival of Simple Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.

To identify use and outcomes of simple hysterectomy compared with radical hysterectomy for women with early-stage cervical cancer. The National Cancer Database was used to review the cases of women with stage IA2 and IB1 (2 cm or less) cervical cancer from 2004 to 2015. Patients were classified based on whether they underwent simple or radical hysterectomy. Survival was examined after propensity score weighting. Simple hysterectomy was performed in 44.6% of women with stage IA2 (n=1,530) and 35.3% of those with stage IB1 (n=3,931) tumors. Rates of simple hysterectomy increased from 37.8% to 52.7% from 2004 to 2014 for stage IA2 cancers and from 29.7% to 43.8% between 2004 and 2013 for stage IB1 cancers. For stage IA2 cancers, younger women and those treated at an academic medical center were less likely to undergo simple hysterectomy. For stage IB1 cancers, black women were more likely to undergo simple hysterectomy, and those treated at an academic medical center were less likely to undergo simple hysterectomy. After propensity score weighting, there was no association between route of hysterectomy and survival for stage IA2 cancers (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.41-1.20, 5-year survival 95.1% for radical hysterectomy vs 97.6% for simple hysterectomy). For stage IB1 cancers, patients who underwent simple hysterectomy were at 55% increased risk of death (HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.18-2.03, and 5-year survival was 95.3% for radical hysterectomy vs 92.4% for simple hysterectomy). Although there was no association between surgical radicality and survival for women with stage IA2 tumors, there was a 55% increase in mortality for women with stage IB1 neoplasms who underwent simple compared with radical hysterectomy. Radical hysterectomy is the treatment of choice for women with stage IB1 cervical cancer.

Efficacy of different surgical approaches in the clinical and survival outcomes of patients with early-stage cervical cancer: protocol of a phase III multicentre randomised controlled trial in China

IntroductionIn the last three decades, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for radical hysterectomy (RH) has become a popular treatment option for early-stage cervical cancer. However, a recently published randomised controlled trial...

Discussion on the diagnosis and treatment of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions in post-menopausal women

Objective: To analyze the performance of colposcopy and investigate the diagnosis and treatment characteristics of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) diagnosed by cervical tissue sampling in post-menopausal women. Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 1 449 patients with HSIL diagnosed by cervical tissue sampling under colposcopy and treated by loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) or extrafascial hysterectomy as the primary therapy at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, from November 2015 to October 2017. In order to investigate the diagnosis and treatment of HSIL in post-menopausal women, a case-control study was conducted to compare the difference in performance of colposcopy and treatment modality between 213 post-menopausal patients (14.7%, 213/1 449) and 1 236 pre-menopausal patients (85.3%, 1 236/1 449). Results: (1)The proportion of cases pathologically upgraded to cervical cancer was significantly greater in post-menopausal patients (9.4%, 20/213) compared with pre-menopausal patients (3.8%, 47/1 236; P<0.05). (2) The proportion of ≥HSIL diagnosed by colposcopy showed no significant difference between post-menopausal patients (76.1%, 162/213) and pre-menopausal patients (78.2%, 967/1 236; P=0.479). The proportion of type Ⅲ transformation zone (TZ) was significantly greater in post-menopausal patients (91.1%, 194/213) compared with pre-menopausal patients (59.1%, 731/1 236; P<0.05). The rate of missed diagnosis of cervical cancer was significantly higher in type Ⅲ TZ (6.4%, 59/925) compared with type Ⅰ and(or) Ⅱ TZ (1.5%, 8/524; P<0.05). The proportion of HSIL detected by endocervical curettage alone was greater in post-menopausal patients (9.9%, 21/213) compared with pre-menopausal patients (2.6%, 32/1 236; P<0.05). (3)Initial treatment with LEEP: the positive rate of endocervical margin was significantly greater in post-menopausal patients (20.5%, 36/176) compared with pre-menopausal patients (10.5%, 130/1 236;P<0.05); in patients who were diagnosed as HSIL after LEEP, the positive rate of endocervical margin and the residual rate were both greater in post-menopausal patients compared with pre-menopausal patients [15.4% (25/162) versus 8.8% (105/1 189), P=0.008; 52.0% (13/25) versus 26.7% (28/105), P=0.014]. (4)Thirty-seven post-menopausal patients were treated by extrafascial hysterectomy as the primary therapy, 5 cases (13.5%, 5/37) were diagnosed as cervical cancer (stage Ⅰa1) after the surgery. Conclusions: (1) The lesions of HSIL in post-menopausal patients still have definite features under colposcopy as same as pre-menopausal patients. Endocervical curettage could help detect more HSIL in post-menopausal patients. Compared with pre-menopausal patients, post-menopausal HSIL patients have an increased risk of cervical cancer and are more likely missed by cervical tissue sampling. (2) LEEP has the dual effects of diagnosis and treatment, and is still the recommended treatment for post-menopausal HSIL patients. However, the increase in positive rate of endocervical margin and residual rate requires further active intervention. (3) Considering those post-menopausal HSIL patients who cannot accept conization as the initial treatment, the selection of hysterectomy type requires more thorough study.

Health disparities in fertility preservation for women with stage IA and stage IB cervical cancer

Health disparities in fertility preservation for women with stage IA and stage IB cervical cancer

An evaluation of 721 women with Stage IA1 cervical cancer: is conservative surgical approach safe?

An evaluation of 721 women with Stage IA1 cervical cancer: is conservative surgical approach safe?

Minimally invasive surgical management of IA1 cervical cancer and effects on overall survival

Objective: We sought to examine the all-cause mortality between patients who undergo minimally invasive (MIS) versus open extrafascial hysterectomy for stage IA1 cervical cancer.

Long-term results of fertility-sparing treatment for early-stage cervical cancer

ObjectiveTo evaluate the long-term outcomes of young early stage cervical cancer patients wishing to preserve their childbearing potential. MethodsData of young (aged <40 years) patients with early stage cervical cancer were prospectively collected. All patients with stage IA2, IB1 and IB2 cervical cancer were included; they have cervical conization and pelvic node dissection performed via minimally invasive surgery. Survival outcomes were assessed with the Kaplan-Meier model. ResultsOverall, 32 patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean (SD) age of the population included was 33 (±4). According to the FIGO 2018 staging system, the stage of disease was IA2, IB1 and IB2 in 9 (28%), 21 (66%) and 2 (6%) cases, respectively. All patients included had cervical conization and laparoscopic pelvic node assessment, including systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy (N = 30, 94%) and sentinel node mapping (N = 2, 6%). In six (19%) patients the planned conservative treatment was discontinued. Median follow-up was 75 (range, 12–184) months. No recurrent disease was diagnosed among patients undergoing conservative treatment; while 2 out of 6 patients having definitive surgical or radiotherapy treatments developed recurrent disease. Five-year disease free and overall survivals were 94% and 97%, respectively. Considering reproductive outcomes, 11 (69%) out of 16 patients who attempted to conceive got pregnant. ConclusionsCervical conization and pelvic nodes assessment could be considered a valid treatment modality for early-stage cervical cancer patients who are wishing to preserve their childbearing potential.

International radical trachelectomy assessment: IRTA study.

Radical trachelectomy is considered a viable option for fertility preservation in patients with low-risk, early-stage cervical cancer. Standard approaches include laparotomy or minimally invasive surgery when performing radical trachelectomy. To compare disease-free survival between patients with FIGO (2009) stage IA2 or IB1 (≤2cm) cervical cancer who underwent open versus minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robotic) radical trachelectomy. We hypothesize that minimally invasive radical trachelectomy has similar oncologic outcomes to those of the open approach. This is a collaborative, multi-institutional, international, retrospective study. Patients who underwent a radical trachelectomy and lymphadenectomy between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2017 will be included. Institutional review board approval will be required. Each institution will be provided access to a study-specific REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) database maintained by MD Anderson Cancer Center and will be responsible for entering patient data. Patients with squamous, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous cervical cancer FIGO (2009) stages IA2 and IB1 (≤2 cm) will be included. Surgery performed by the open approach or minimally invasive approach (laparoscopy or robotics). Tumor size ≤2 cm, by physical examination, ultrasound, MRI, CT, or positron emission tomography (at least one should confirm a tumor size ≤2 cm). Centers must contribute at least 15 cases of radical trachelectomy (open, minimally invasive, or both). Prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy to the pelvis for cervical cancer at any time, prior lymphadenectomy, or pelvic retroperitoneal surgery, pregnant patients, aborted trachelectomy (intra-operative conversion to radical hysterectomy), or vaginal approach. The primary endpoint is disease-free survival measured as the time from surgery until recurrence or death due to disease. To evaluate the primary objective, we will compare disease-free survival among patients with FIGO (2009) stage IA2 or IB1 (≤2cm) cervical cancer who underwent open versus minimally invasive radical trachelectomy. An estimated 535 patients will be included; 256 open and 279 minimally invasive radical trachelectomy. Previous studies have shown that recurrence rates in the open group range from 3.8% to 7.6%. Assuming that the 4.5-year disease-free survival rate for patients who underwent open surgery is 95.0%, we have 80% power to detect a 0.44 HR using α level 0.10. This corresponds to an 89.0% disease-free survival rate at 4.5 years in the minimally invasive group.

Updated Opinion of the Uterus Commission of the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO) and the Gynecological Endoscopy Working Group (AGE) of the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) on the Randomized Study Comparing Minimally Invasive with Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Early-stage Cervical Cancer (LACC).

In this opinion on the randomized study comparing minimally invasive with abdominal radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer (LACC), the Uterus Commission of the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO) and the Gynecological Endoscopy Working Group (AGE) of the Germany Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) state that, based on their examination of the published data, patients with FIGO stage IA1 (with LVSI), IA2 or IB1 cervical cancer must be informed about the results of this LACC study prior to making a decision on the route for radical hysterectomy.

Survival after Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

BackgroundMinimally invasive surgery was adopted as an alternative to laparotomy (open surgery) for radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer before high-quality evidence regarding its effect on survival was available. We sought to determine the effect of minimally invasive surgery on all-cause mortality among women undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.MethodsWe performed a cohort study involving women who underwent radical hysterectomy for stage IA2 or IB1 cervical cancer during the 2010–2013 period at Commission on Cancer–accredited hospitals in the United States. The study used inverse probability of treatment propensity-score weighting. We also conducted an interrupted time-series analysis involving women who underwent radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer during the 2000–2010 period, using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database.ResultsIn the primary analysis, 1225 of 2461 women (49.8%) underwent minimally invasive surgery. Women treated with minimally invasive surgery were more often white, privately insured, and from ZIP Codes with higher socioeconomic status, had smaller, lower-grade tumors, and were more likely to have received a diagnosis later in the study period than women who underwent open surgery. Over a median follow-up of 45 months, the 4-year mortality was 9.1% among women who underwent minimally invasive surgery and 5.3% among those who underwent open surgery (hazard ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22 to 2.22; P=0.002 by the log-rank test). Before the adoption of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (i.e., in the 2000–2006 period), the 4-year relative survival rate among women who underwent radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer remained stable (annual percentage change, 0.3%; 95% CI, −0.1 to 0.6). The adoption of minimally invasive surgery coincided with a decline in the 4-year relative survival rate of 0.8% (95% CI, 0.3 to 1.4) per year after 2006 (P=0.01 for change of trend).ConclusionsIn an epidemiologic study, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was associated with shorter overall survival than open surgery among women with stage IA2 or IB1 cervical carcinoma. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others.)

Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer

BackgroundThere are limited data from retrospective studies regarding whether survival outcomes after laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (minimally invasive surgery) are equivalent to those after open abdominal radical hysterectomy (open surgery) among women with early-stage cervical cancer.MethodsIn this trial involving patients with stage IA1 (lymphovascular invasion), IA2, or IB1 cervical cancer and a histologic subtype of squamous-cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma, we randomly assigned patients to undergo minimally invasive surgery or open surgery. The primary outcome was the rate of disease-free survival at 4.5 years, with noninferiority claimed if the lower boundary of the two-sided 95% confidence interval of the between-group difference (minimally invasive surgery minus open surgery) was greater than −7.2 percentage points (i.e., closer to zero).ResultsA total of 319 patients were assigned to minimally invasive surgery and 312 to open surgery. Of the patients who were assigned to and underwent minimally invasive surgery, 84.4% underwent laparoscopy and 15.6% robot-assisted surgery. Overall, the mean age of the patients was 46.0 years. Most patients (91.9%) had stage IB1 disease. The two groups were similar with respect to histologic subtypes, the rate of lymphovascular invasion, rates of parametrial and lymph-node involvement, tumor size, tumor grade, and the rate of use of adjuvant therapy. The rate of disease-free survival at 4.5 years was 86.0% with minimally invasive surgery and 96.5% with open surgery, a difference of −10.6 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], −16.4 to −4.7). Minimally invasive surgery was associated with a lower rate of disease-free survival than open surgery (3-year rate, 91.2% vs. 97.1%; hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death from cervical cancer, 3.74; 95% CI, 1.63 to 8.58), a difference that remained after adjustment for age, body-mass index, stage of disease, lymphovascular invasion, and lymph-node involvement; minimally invasive surgery was also associated with a lower rate of overall survival (3-year rate, 93.8% vs. 99.0%; hazard ratio for death from any cause, 6.00; 95% CI, 1.77 to 20.30).ConclusionsIn this trial, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was associated with lower rates of disease-free survival and overall survival than open abdominal radical hysterectomy among women with early-stage cervical cancer. (Funded by the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and Medtronic; LACC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00614211.)

Characteristics and outcomes of reproductive-aged women with early-stage cervical cancer: trachelectomy vs hysterectomy

Trachelectomy is the treatment of choice for reproductive-aged women with early-stage cervical cancer who desire future fertility. Comprehensive population-based statistics have been missing to date. We sought to compare characteristics and survival of reproductive-aged women who underwent trachelectomy for early-stage cervical cancer to those who had hysterectomy. This is a retrospective observational study examining the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program from 1998 through 2014. Women <45 years of age with stage IA and IB1 (tumor size ≤2 cm) cervical cancer who underwent trachelectomy were compared to those who underwent hysterectomy. Multivariable models were used to identify clinicopathological factors associated with trachelectomy. Survival was compared between the 2 groups after propensity score matching. Among 6359 women, 190 (3.0%; 95% confidence interval, 2.6-3.4) underwent trachelectomy. The median age of the trachelectomy group was 31 years (interquartile range, 28-34). The proportion of women who underwent trachelectomy significantly increased during the study period (1.2% in 1998 through 2002, 3.0% in 2003 through 2008, and 4.5% in 2009 through 2014, P < .001). Younger age, nonblack race, single marital status, eastern registry area, recent disease diagnosis, nonsquamous histology, and higher stage were independent factors associated with trachelectomy use (all, adjusted P < .05). After propensity score matching, 5-year cause-specific survival (96.9% vs 96.6%; hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-2.30; P= .59) and overall survival (96.1% vs 96.6%; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-2.20; P= .61) were similar between the trachelectomy group and the hysterectomy group. Our study found that there was a significant increase in the proportion of reproductive-aged women with stage IA or IB1 (≤2 cm) cervical cancer who underwent trachelectomy in recent years. Survival with trachelectomy was similar to those who had hysterectomy in this population.

Incidence of Lymph Node Metastases in Women With Low-Risk Early Cervical Cancer (

To determine the incidence of lymph node metastasis in women with low-risk cervical cancer stage IA2 or IB1 (<2 cm) without lymph-vascular space invasion. A multicenter retrospective study was performed in patients who underwent radical or simple hysterectomy, conization, or trachelectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical cancer between January 2000 and June 2016. A total of 271 patients were included in the study. Median age and body mass index were 46 years (range, 23-77 years) and 24 kg/m (range, 18-48 kg/m), respectively. Twenty-two patients had stage IA2 (8.1%), and 249 (91.9%) had stage IB1. The median tumor size was 14 mm (range, 5-20 mm). Tumor grades were 1 (n = 63 [23.2%]), 2 (n = 120 [44.3%]), 3 (n = 63 [23.2%]), and unknown (25 [9.2%]). Median depth stromal invasion was 6 mm (range, 3-20 mm). Histologic subtypes included squamous (n = 171 [63.1%]), adenocarcinoma (n = 92 [33.9%]), and adenosquamous (n = 8 [3.0%]). Overall incidence of lymph node metastasis was 2.9% (n = 8). The incidence of lymph node involvement in G1, G2, and G3 was 0% (0/63), 5% (6/120), and 3.1% (2/63), respectively. No patient with stage IA2 (regardless of grade or histology) or G1 cervical cancer less than 2 cm (stage IB1) had lymph node metastasis. Patients with stage IA2 or IB1 (G1) with tumor size of less than 2 cm and no lymph-vascular space invasion may not need lymph node evaluation. On the other hand, 95% and 98% of patients with grade 2 or 3 tumors, respectively, could potentially undergo an unnecessary lymphadenectomy. Further studies with bigger sample size are required to confirm these results.

Patterns of Care for Stage IA Cervical Cancer: A Study of the Utilization of Curative-Intent Radiation Therapy versus Hysterectomy-Type Surgery

The standard of care for clinical IA cervical cancer is surgery versus radiotherapy. Herein, we investigated practice patterns associated with administration of 1) radiation therapy (RT) alone, 2) definitive hysterectomy (HYS) alone, and 3) the addition of RT to HYS. Regarding the treatment of clinical IA cervical cancer, we predict that socioeconomic disparities influence patterns of care. The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was queried for clinical IA primary cervical cancer cases (2004-2013) receiving curative-intent RT and/or HYS. Patients with unknown RT status were excluded, as were benign histologies and receipt of fertility sparing surgery. Patient, tumor, and treatment parameters were extracted. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate overall survival (OS) between patients receiving 1) RT alone, 2) HYS alone and 3) the addition of RT to HYS. Cox proportional hazards modeling determined variables associated with receipt of RT, HYS and OS. In total, 3816 patients were analyzed (n=3514 [92.1%] HYS alone, n=100 [2.6%] RT alone, n=202 [5.3%] HYS + RT). On multivariate analysis of HYS alone versus RT alone, RT was more likely to be given to patients that were older (p<0.001) and with Medicare (p=0.011) or uninsured/unknown status (p=0.003). Treatment by HYS alone approached significance with the two highest income quartiles (p=0.013, p=0.054). On multivariate analysis of patients receiving RT in addition to HYS, adjuvant RT was added most commonly for positive margins (p=<0.001) and increasing age (p=<0.001). The five year overall survival was higher with HYS alone than with RT alone (96% vs 69%, p=<0.0001). The addition of RT to HYS did not improve overall survival. Socioeconomic factors were associated with receipt of RT alone versus HYS alone for clinical stage IA cervical cancer. Although these data must be further validated with better-defined patient selection, these factors need to be addressed in order to ensure the highest quality cancer care to all patients.

Positive Correlation Between Clearance of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus and Lack of Residual Disease After Loop Excision of the Transformation Zone in Early Stage Cervical Cancer.

In cervical cancer, a number of pathological parameters have been explored for their utility in tailoring a less aggressive approach for patients with low-risk early stage disease. We examined whether, in patients with cervical cancer stage IA1 to IB1, diagnosed by loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ), positive for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV), clearance of hrHPV after LLETZ correlates with absence of residual disease at the final pathology after definitive or further surgery. Data were collected from patients diagnosed with early stage invasive cervical cancer and positive hrHPV DNA, who had a repeat cervical HPV test 3 to 12 weeks after LLETZ and before final surgical treatment. We compared characteristics of patients with post-LLETZ negative and positive hrHPV. Of 28 patients, 13 were post-LLETZ negative hrHPV; of these, 11 did not have residual cancer in the final pathological specimen; two patients had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3. Of the 15 women who had post-LLETZ positive hrHPV, 10 had residual cancer in the final pathological specimen and 3 had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or adenocarcinoma in situ; only 2 were negative for cancer. The post-LLETZ hrHPV test shows a sensitivity of 86.7% and specificity of 84.6%. Clearance of hrHPV from the cervix after LLETZ was found to correlate with the absence of residual cancer in the final surgical specimen. Testing for hrHPV post-LLETZ might serve as a new parameter for risk assessment and tailoring of a less radical operation in women with early stage cervical cancer.

Medicaid payer status is associated with increased cancer-related mortality among stage IA cervical cancer patients

Medicaid payer status is associated with increased cancer-related mortality among stage IA cervical cancer patients

The management of pregnancy after trachelectomy for early cervical cancer

Key content Cervical cancer continues to affect many women in the UK with over half under the age of 45 years at the time of diagnosis; with a trend towards starting families later in life this raises fertility concerns. While the standard treatment for stage IA2 or IB1 cervical cancer is a radical hysterectomy, radical trachelectomy has been shown to have equivalent 5‐year survival and is a surgical option if there is a wish to preserve fertility. Although trachelectomies are performed by gynaecological oncologists, the management of any subsequent pregnancies falls under the remit of obstetricians who therefore require a sound knowledge of the procedure and potential obstetric sequelae. Pregnancies following trachelectomy are high risk because of the increased rate of mid‐trimester miscarriage and preterm delivery, often as a consequence of preterm prelabour rupture of membranes. Delivery is by caesarean section, traditionally by classical section as a permanent isthmic suture is placed at the time of trachelectomy, but nowadays a transverse incision may be used to reduce morbidity and the implications on future fertility. Learning objectives Management of a pregnancy following radical trachelectomy. Intrapartum care of post‐radical trachelectomy pregnancy and complication risks. Impact of trachelectomy and subsequent pregnancy on the woman. Ethical issues Informed consent surrounding trachelectomy and future pregnancies.

Why do we continue to overtreat stage Ia carcinoma of the cervix?

The current recommended treatment for stage Ia2 cervical cancer is a radical or modified radical hysterectomy. Although in the United States the incidence of cervical cancer is low and declining, almost 50% of the >4000 new cases will present in early stages. An estimated 2200 women each year will undergo radical hysterectomy and many will have both early- and late-onset complications. The purpose of this review is to examine if there is still a role for radical hysterectomy in the proper treatment of stage Ia2 cervical cancer given most recent data. Sufficient histological evidence suggests that although parametrial involvement and lymph node metastases can increase the risk for recurrence, they are relatively uncommon at early stages. Worldwide data that challenge radical hysterectomy as standard of care have shown that conservative management of stage Ia2 cervical cancer results in similar survival and recurrence rates. It is the recommendation based on all reviewed data that radical hysterectomy should no longer be considered standard of care in all cases of stage Ia2 cervical cancer.

Analysis of Conservative Surgical Treatment and Prognosis of Microinvasive Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Cervix Stage IA1: Results of Follow-Up to 20 Years.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognosis and recurrence of microinvasive squamous cervical (MIC) cancer stage IA1 in women treated conservatively or by hysterectomy, and followed-up to 20 years. It was studied in a cohort of 139 women with MIC, 41 definitively managed by conization and 98 by hysterectomy from January 1994 to December 2003 and followed-up until 2013. The definitive treatment, age, conization technique (loop electrosurgical excision procedure or cold knife conization), cone margin, residual disease in hysterectomy specimen, and the association with recurrence (intraepithelial cervical neoplasia grade 3/intraepithelial vaginal neoplasia grade 3 or worse, and microinvasive or worse) were analyzed. There were 2.5 times more conservative treatment in younger women than older (>40 years), and high proportion of residual disease in hysterectomy specimens (67% of intraepithelial cervical neoplasia grade 3 or worse), more common if positive cone margin (74% vs 35%, P < 0.002). There were 2.3% (3/133) recurrences detected as microinvasive or worse, and 6% (8/133) recurrences detected as intraepithelial cervical neoplasia grade 3/intraepithelial vaginal neoplasia grade 3 or worse: 7.3% (3/41) in the conization group and 5.4% (5/92) in the hysterectomy group (P = 0.701). Almost all recurrences (88%, 7/8) were diagnosed until 36 months after treatment, and they were not associated with conization technique. There were no differences in risk of recurrence and overall disease-free survival time related to type of treatment. This study demonstrates the good prognosis of MIC, regardless the treatment. When fertility is not a concern, hysterectomy should be considered as definitive treatment to avoid the risk of residual disease. Regular follow-up for a long period should be maintained.

Ovarian Conservation and Overall Survival in Young Women With Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.

To identify predictors of ovarian conservation at hysterectomy and to examine the association of ovarian conservation and survival of young women with early-stage cervical cancer. This is a retrospective cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program to identify hysterectomy-based surgically treated patients with stage I cervical cancer diagnosed between 1983 and 2012 (N=16,511). Multivariable models were used to identify independent factors associated with ovarian conservation. Among the subgroup of 9,419 women younger than 50 years of age with stage I disease, survival outcomes and causes of death were examined for 3,908 (41.5%) women who underwent ovarian conservation at hysterectomy without radiotherapy. On multivariable analysis, age younger than 50 years, stage IA disease, and squamous histology were independent factors associated with ovarian conservation (all, P<.001). Among 5,526 women younger than 50 years of age with stage IA disease who underwent hysterectomy without radiotherapy, overall survival was significantly higher in patients undergoing ovarian conservation than in those undergoing oophorectomy (20-year rate, 93.5% compared with 86.8%, P<.001); cervical cancer-specific survival was similar between the patients who underwent ovarian conservation and those who underwent oophorectomy (98.8% compared with 97.8%, P=.12). On multivariable analysis, ovarian conservation remained an independent prognostic factor for improved overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.82, P=.001) and was independently associated with lower cumulative risks of death resulting from cardiovascular disease (20-year cumulative rate, 1.2% compared with 3.3%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.26-0.86, P=.014) and other chronic disease (0.5% compared with 1.4%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.24, 95% CI 0.09-0.65, P=.005) compared with oophorectomy. Both cervical cancer-specific survival (20-year rate, 93.1% compared with 92.0%, P=.37) and overall survival (86.7% compared with 84.6%, P=.12) were similar between ovarian conservation and oophorectomy among 3,893 women younger than 50 years of age with stage IB disease who underwent hysterectomy without radiotherapy. Among young women with stage IA cervical cancer, ovarian conservation at hysterectomy is associated with decreased all-cause mortality including death resulting from cardiovascular disease and other chronic diseases.