European Society Of Gynaecological Oncology Research Articles

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease (ISSVD), the European College for the Study of Vulval Disease (ECSVD), and the European Federation for Colposcopy (EFC) Consensus Statement on the Management of Vaginal Intraepithelial Neoplasia.

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease (ISSVD), the European College for the Study of Vulval Disease (ECSVD), and the European Federation for Colposcopy (EFC) developed consensus statements on pre-invasive vulvar lesions in order to improve the quality of care for patients with vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VaIN). The management of VaIN varies according to the grade of the lesion: VaIN 1 (low grade vaginal squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL)) can be subjected to follow-up, while VaIN 2-3 (high-grade vaginal SIL) should be treated. Treatment needs individualization according to the patient's characteristics, disease extension and previous therapeutic procedures. Surgical excision is the mainstay of treatment and should be performed if invasion cannot be excluded. Total vaginectomy is used only in highly selected cases of extensive and persistent disease. Carbon dioxide (CO2) laser may be used as both an ablation method and an excisional one. Reported cure rates after laser excision and laser ablation are similar. Topical agents are useful for persistent, multifocal lesions or for patients who cannot undergo surgical treatment. Imiquimod was associated with the lowest recurrence rate, highest human papillomavirus (HPV) clearance, and can be considered the best topical approach. Trichloroacetic acid and 5-fluorouracil are historical options and should be discouraged. For VaIN after hysterectomy for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3, laser vaporization and topical agents are not the best options, since they cannot reach epithelium buried in the vaginal scar. In these cases surgical options are preferable. Brachytherapy has a high overall success rate but due to late side effects should be reserved for poor surgical candidates, having multifocal disease, and with failed prior treatments. VaIN tends to recur and ensuring patient adherence to close follow-up visits is of the utmost importance. The first evaluation should be performed at 6 months with cytology and an HPV test during 2 years and annually thereafter. The implementation of vaccination against HPV infection is expected to contribute to the prevention of VaIN and thus cancer of the vagina. The effects of treatment can have an impact on quality of life and result in psychological and psychosexual issues which should be addressed. Patients with VaIN need clear and up-to-date information on a range of treatment options including risks and benefits, as well as the need for follow-up and the risk of recurrence.

Back to the future: The impact of oestrogen receptor profile in the era of molecular endometrial cancer classification

PurposeThe aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the oestrogen receptor (ER) profile on oncologic outcomes in the new endometrial cancer (EC) risk classification. MethodsImmunohistochemistry (IHC) analyses were performed in a retrospectively reviewed large series of ECs to assess the presence/absence of oestrogen receptors (ER0\\1+ or ER2+\\3+) and other molecular factors (i.e. p53 mutation, p53mut; and mismatch repair mutational status, MMRd (mismatch repair deficient) versus MMRp (mismatch repair proficient)), histopathologic and clinical outcomes. ER status was correlated with molecular, histologic, clinical and prognostic data. Results891 EC patients were included in the study (211 ER0\\1+ and 680 ER2+\\3+). The ER0\\1+ phenotype was associated with an unfavourable clinicopathological profile (i.e. grading, histotype, lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), stages, etc.). Simple regression showed that risk class, p53mut, and ER0/1+ impacted on both disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) (p < 0.05). In the ER0/1+ population, p53mut no longer influenced DFS and OS (p > 0.05). In multiple regression, age, high and advanced/metastatic risk classes influenced survival outcomes (p < 0.05), but lost significance in the ER0/1+ population (p > 0.05). ER-positivity retained a remarkable prognostic impact even after stratification of the population according to the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology, and the European Society of Pathology (ESGO/ESTRO/ESP) 2021 risk classes and molecular classification. ER0/1+ intermediate, high-intermediate, high and advanced risk versus ER2+/3+ intermediate, high-intermediate, high and advanced risk classes showed statistically different OS and DFS (p< 0.001). ER0/1+ status was associated with a worse prognosis when associated with MMRp, MMRd and p53mut compared to the same molecular classes associated with ER2+/3 (p < 0.001). ConclusionsWe demonstrated that ER status has a significant impact on oncologic outcomes, regardless of risk class and p53/MMR status. Based on our results, we recommend the inclusion of ER assessment in featured EC risk classification system.

Fertility-Sparing Management of Early Stage Endometrial Cancer: A Narrative Review of the Literature

Objectives: The incidence of endometrial cancer (EC) is rising largely due to the increasing levels of obesity along with an ageing population. This has led to an increase in the incidence of premenopausal women with EC. 5% of cases are in patients less than 40 years old, 70% of which are nulliparous at diagnosis. Therefore, fertility considerations must be taken into account when managing these patients. The objectives of this review are to present the fertility-sparing management options available. Mechanism: A detailed computerized literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE up to 1st June 2022 was carried out in order to survey the evidence for fertility-sparing treatment. Studies including patients with endometrial hyperplasia and early-stage EC undergoing fertility-sparing management were included. Findings in Brief: Progestin acts by downregulating oestrogen receptors, thereby suppressing endometrial growth. Oral progestins and the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (IUS) have therefore been used as non-surgical hormonal treatment for EC. Megestrol acetate (MA) has been shown to produce the highest remission rates compared to other progestins in a systematic review and meta-analysis, but medroxyprogesterone acetate exhibited lower recurrence rates. The IUS for atypical hyperplasia (AH) and EC showed that the majority of patients responded by 3 months’ use. A minimum duration of hormonal treatment for AH and EC of 6 months has been advocated, based on randomised studies showing greater efficacy when compared to 3 months treatment. A meta-analysis and systematic review assessing the efficacy of both oral and intra-uterine progestins showed a higher pooled complete response (CR) than with IUS alone. Metformin, gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists and weight loss have also been added to progestin regimes with variable results on EC regression. Hysteroscopic resection allows for targeted excision of early-stage EC, but with the risk of perforation and so this has not been recommended by the British Gynaecological Cancer Society or the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology. Assisted reproduction treatment (ART) may be the quickest way to achieve pregnancy once CR is achieved. Pregnancy rates have varied from 32–100%, with live birth rates varying from 17.9–43.8%. Conclusions: EC incidence is on the increase in the premenopausal population along with obesity rates and the average first age of parenthood. Fertility-sparing management of EC should be considered for women where fertility is desired.

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE Guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

The standard surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma (EC) consisting of total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy drastically affects the quality of life of patients and creates a challenge for clinicians. Recent evidence-based guidelines of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in EC in a multidisciplinary setting. While also addressing work-up for fertility preservation treatments and the management and follow-up for fertility preservation, it was considered relevant to further extend the guidance on fertility sparing treatment. To define recommendations for fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma. ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of EC (11 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2016, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 95 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. The multidisciplinary development group formulated 48 recommendations for fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma in four sections: patient selection, tumour clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and special issues. These recommendations provide guidance to professionals caring for women with endometrial carcinoma, including but not limited to professionals in the field of gynaecological oncology, onco-fertility, reproductive surgery, endoscopy, conservative surgery, and histopathology, and will help towards a holistic and multidisciplinary approach for this challenging clinical scenario. What is new? A collaboration was set up between the ESGO, ESHRE and ESGE, aiming to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines focusing on key aspects of fertility-sparing treatment in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE Guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

The standard surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma (EC) consisting of total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy drastically affects the quality of life of patients and creates a challenge for clinicians. Recent evidence-based guidelines of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in EC in a multidisciplinary setting. While also addressing work-up for fertility preservation treatments and the management and follow-up for fertility preservation, it was considered relevant to further extend the guidance on fertility sparing treatment. To define recommendations for fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma. ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of EC (11 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2016, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 95 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. The multidisciplinary development group formulated 48 recommendations for fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma in four sections: patient selection, tumour clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and special issues. These recommendations provide guidance to professionals caring for women with endometrial carcinoma, including but not limited to professionals in the field of gynaecological oncology, onco-fertility, reproductive surgery, endoscopy, conservative surgery, and histopathology, and will help towards a holistic and multidisciplinary approach for this challenging clinical scenario. A collaboration was set up between the ESGO, ESHRE and ESGE, aiming to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines focusing on key aspects of fertility-sparing treatment in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE Guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

The standard surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma, consisting of total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, drastically affects the quality of life of patients and creates a challenge for clinicians. Recent evidence-based guidelines of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) provide comprehensive information on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in endometrial carcinoma in a multidisciplinary setting. While addressing also work-up for fertility preservation treatments and the management and follow-up for fertility preservation, it was considered relevant to further extend the guidance on fertility-sparing treatment.A collaboration was set up between the ESGO, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), aiming to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines focusing on key aspects of fertility-sparing treatment (patient selection, tumor clinicopathological characteristics, treatment, special issues) in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of endometrial carcinoma (11 experts from across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2016, identified by a systematic search, was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 95 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives.

77P The impact of COVID-19 on gynecological cancer diagnoses in Greece

It has been almost three years since the COVID-19 outbreak, yet evidence of its impact on the cancer care landscape remains scant. The present single-center study examines patterns in gynecological cancer diagnoses before and during the pandemic. All female patients diagnosed in our academic hospital with gynecological cancer, between January 2017 and December 2020, were retrospectively identified. Pre-defined subgroup analyses were performed in patients who had been newly diagnosed during 2020 and in the pre-pandemic 3-year period. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization for Good Clinical Practice. In total, 1,193 women were included in this case-control study; 1,001 (83.91%) were identified in the pre-pandemic period as a control, while 192 (16.09%) cases were allocated in the pandemic group. The two cohorts were similar regarding demographic and clinical characteristics. For the pre-pandemic period, the mean yearly number of patients with newly identified cancer was highest for endometrial (149; 44.61%), followed by ovarian (92; 27.5%) carcinomas. During the first year of the pandemic, the number of new diagnoses significantly decreased by 42.5% (from 334 to 192) for all types of malignancies combined (one sample t-test p-value= 0.014). Declines ranged from 36.96% to 49% for ovarian and endometrial cancer, respectively. This is the first study to appraise a timely snapshot of the effect of COVID-19 on newly diagnosed gynecological tumors in a European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO)-certified center in Greece, demonstrating an alarmingly sharp decline in the number of new cases during the pandemic. It is of utmost importance the gynecologic oncologists to ensure the continuum of care for their patients.Table: 77PDemographic data for patients with newly diagnosed gynecological cancer, by time periodCancer typePre-pandemic period (01-12/2017)Pre-pandemic period (01-12/2018)Pre-pandemic period (01-12/2019)Pandemic period (01-12/2020)TotalCervical73 (19.89%)61 (19.68%)56 (17.28%)39 (20.31%)229 (19.20%)Endometrial174 (47.41%)129 (41.61%)145 (44.75%)76 (39.58%)524 (43.92%)Ovarian84 (22.89%)92 (29.68%)101 (31.17%)58 (30.21%)335 (28.08%)Vulvar30 (8.17%)21 (6.77%)20 (6.17%)14 (7.29%)85 (7.12%)Other6 (1.63%)7 (2.26%)2 (0.62%)5 (2.60%)20 (1.68%)Total367 (100%)310 (100%)324 (100%)192 (100%)1,193 (100%)Pearson chi2 (12) = 13.1806; Pr= 0.356 Open table in a new tab

Assessment of Hospital Volume in the Surgical Management of Endometrial and Ovarian Cancer: A Polish Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND Surgery is a cornerstone in management of ovarian and endometrial cancer. The European Society of Gynecological Oncology introduced quality indicators to improve management of these cancers. The optimal annual number of surgeries per unit was established for high-quality surgical treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS The database of the National Health Fund on surgical management of endometrial and ovarian cancer was analyzed. Patients treated between 2017 and 2020 were included. Departments where patients underwent surgery were divided according to number of surgeries performed per year in endometrial cancer: ≥80, 79-50, 49-20, 19-0; and ovarian cancer: ≥100, 99-50, 49-20, 19-0. Optimal number of surgeries per center was defined as at least 100 and 80 surgeries per year in ovarian and endometrial cancer, respectively. RESULTS Totally, there were 22 325 surgeries in 316 units and 10 381 surgeries in 251 units due to endometrial and ovarian cancer, respectively. Most surgeries in endometrial cancer (n=15 077; 67.5%) and ovarian cancer (n=9642; 92.88%) were performed in departments that did not meet optimal criteria in number of surgeries. Between 2017 and 2019, an increasing trend in number of surgeries per year in endometrial and ovarian cancer was found. In 2020, there was a decrease in the number of surgeries by 7.8% (n=453) and 8.6% (n=234) in endometrial and ovarian cancer, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In Poland, surgical treatment of ovarian and endometrial cancer is decentralized. Most cancer patients underwent surgery in low-volume general gynecologic departments. The COVID-19 pandemic impaired cancer management, leading to a decreased number of surgeries.

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE Guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

How should fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma be performed? Forty-eight recommendations were formulated on fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma. The standard surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma consisting of total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy drastically affects the quality of life of patients and creates a challenge for clinicians. Recent evidence-based guidelines of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in endometrial carcinoma in a multidisciplinary setting. While addressing also work-up for fertility preservation treatments and the management and follow-up for fertility preservation, it was considered relevant to further extend the guidance on fertility-sparing treatment. A collaboration was set up between the ESGO, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), aiming to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines focusing on key aspects of fertility-sparing treatment in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide. ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of endometrial carcinoma (11 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2016, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgement was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 95 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. The multidisciplinary development group formulated 48 recommendations in four sections; patient selection, tumour clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and special issues. Of the 48 recommendations, none could be based on level I evidence and only 16 could be based on level II evidence, implicating that 66% of the recommendations are supported only by observational data, professional experience and consensus of the development group. These recommendations provide guidance to professionals caring for women with endometrial carcinoma, including but not limited to professionals in the field of gynaecological oncology, onco-fertility, reproductive surgery, endoscopy, conservative surgery and histopathology, and will help towards a holistic and multidisciplinary approach for this challenging clinical scenario. All costs relating to the development process were covered from ESGO, ESHRE and ESGE funds. There was no external funding of the development process or manuscript production. G.S. has reported grants from MSD Italia S.r.l., advisory boards for Storz, Bayer, Astrazeneca, Metronic, TESARO Bio Italy S.r.l and Johnson & Johnson, and honoraria for lectures from Clovis Oncology Italy S.r.l. M.G. has reported advisory boards for Gedeon Richter and Merck. The other authors have reported no conflicts of interest. This document represents the views of ESHRE, ESGO and ESGE which are the result of consensus between the relevant stakeholders and where relevant based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. The recommendations should be used for informational and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care, or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type.

Interviews conducted at the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology 2022 Congress: a ENYGO-IJGC Fellows initiative

During the 23rd Congress on Gynaecological Oncology held in Berlin in October 2022, eight interviews on relevant and up-to-date topics in gynecologic oncology with leading speakers were conducted by current...

Endometrial cancer risk factors, treatment, and survival outcomes as per the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) - European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) - European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) risk groups and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging: An experience from developing world.

There is limited data on endometrial cancer from developing countries. The risk groups as defined by the ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO and their recommendations for adjuvant treatment have redefined the management protocols. In this retrospective analysis, the outcomes are assessed in the light of the new risk groups and FIGO staging. One hundred and two patients of endometrial cancer reporting to the Department of Radiation Oncology from 2015 to 2019 were analysed retrospectively. Patients were stratified as per the ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO risk groups and FIGO staging. Patients were analysed for demographic profile, histopathology details, FIGO stage, treatment modalities received as per the ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO risk groups and the outcomes in terms of disease free survival and overall survival. A total of 102 patients were analysed. The mean age at presentation was 57.7 years. Seventy four percent (74.41%) were stage I patients, 14.7 % were stage II, 8.8% were stage III and remaining 2% were stage IV. The mean disease free survival for the patients in FIGO stage I, II, III and IV were found to be 63.5 (59.9 - 67) months, 60.5 (54.2 - 66.9) months, 30.9 (21.5 - 40.2) months and 15.4 (7.8 - 23.0) months respectively. The 5-year overall survival of patients in Stage I was 90.3%. The 3-year mortality of Stage III patients was 58.3%. While there was no mortality observed among Stage II patients, none of the Stage IV patient survived beyond 20 months. The 5-year disease-free survival for patients in Low Risk (LR) group, Intermediate Risk (IR) group and High Risk (HR) group was found to be 91.3%, 90% and 87% respectively. None of the patient in High Intermediate Risk (HIR) group experienced progression of disease and 33.3% patients in advanced group were disease free at 2 years follow-up. The multivariate analysis showed that lymph node involvement is significantly associated with disease-free (p=0.03) and overall survival (p=0.04). Even in the developing world, majority of patients present in early stage with survival outcomes comparable to the West. FIGO stage and lymph node involvement continue to be the most important prognostic markers for disease outcomes.

SUCCOR quality: validation of ESGO quality indicators for surgical treatment of cervical cancer

ObjectiveTo evaluate whether compliance with European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) surgery quality indicators impacts disease-free survival in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, 15...

Radical Hysterectomy for Early Stage Cervical Cancer.

Radical hysterectomy and plus pelvic node dissection are the primary methods of treatment for patients with early stage cervical cancer. During the last decade, growing evidence has supported the adoption of a minimally invasive approach. Retrospective data suggested that minimally invasive surgery improves perioperative outcomes, without neglecting long-term oncologic outcomes. In 2018, the guidelines from the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology stated that a “minimally invasive approach is favored” in comparison with open surgery. However, the phase III, randomized Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial questioned the safety of the minimally invasive approach. The LACC trial highlighted that the execution of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy correlates with an increased risk of recurrence and death. After its publication, other retrospective studies investigated this issue, with differing results. Recent evidence suggested that robotic-assisted surgery is not associated with an increased risk of worse oncologic outcomes. The phase III randomized Robotic-assisted Approach to Cervical Cancer (RACC) and the Robotic Versus Open Hysterectomy Surgery in Cervix Cancer (ROCC) trials will clarify the pros and cons of performing a robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy (with tumor containment before colpotomy) in early stage cervical cancer.

Residual Microscopic Peritoneal Metastases after Macroscopic Complete Cytoreductive Surgery for Advanced High-Grade Serous Ovarian Carcinoma: A Target for Folate Receptor Targeted Photodynamic Therapy?

Despite conventional treatment combining complete macroscopic cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and systemic chemotherapy, residual microscopic peritoneal metastases (mPM) may persist as the cause of peritoneal recurrence in 60% of patients. Therefore, there is a real need to specifically target these mPM to definitively eradicate any traces of the disease and improve patient survival. Therapeutic targeting method, such as photodynamic therapy, would be a promising method for such a purpose. Folate receptor alpha (FRα), as it is specifically overexpressed by cancer cells from various origins, including ovarian cancer cells, is a good target to address photosensitizing molecules. The aim of this study was to determine FRα expression by residual mPM after complete macroscopic CRS in patients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). A prospective study conducted between 1 June 2018 and 10 July 2019 in a single referent center accredited by the European Society of Gynecological Oncology for advanced EOC surgical management. Consecutive patients presenting with advanced HGSOC and eligible for complete macroscopic CRS were included. Up to 13 peritoneal biopsies were taken from macroscopically healthy peritoneum at the end of CRS and examined for the presence of mPM. In case of detection of mPM, a systematic search for RFα expression by immunohistochemistry was performed. Twenty-six patients were included and 26.9% presented mPM. In the subgroup of patients with mPM, FRα expression was positive on diagnostic biopsy before neoadjuvant chemotherapy for 67% of patients, on macroscopic peritoneal metastases for 86% of patients, and on mPM for 75% of patients. In the subgroup of patients with no mPM, FRα expression was found on diagnostic biopsy before neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 29% of patients and on macroscopic peritoneal metastases in 78% of patients. FRα is well expressed by patients with or without mPM after complete macroscopic CRS in patients with advanced HGSOC. In addition to conventional cytoreductive surgery, the use of a therapeutic targeting method, such as photodynamic therapy, by addressing photosensitizing molecules that specifically target FRα may be studied.

European Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) gynecologic oncology survey: Status of ERAS protocol implementation across Europe.

To acquire a comprehensive assessment of the current status of implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols across Europe. The survey was launched by The European Network of Young Gynecologic Oncologists (ENYGO). A 45-item survey was disseminated online through the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO) Network database. A total of 116 ESGO centers participated in the survey between December 2020 and June 2021. Overall, 80 (70%) centers reported that ERAS was implemented at their institution: 63% reported a length of stay (LOS) for advanced ovarian cancer surgery between 5 and 7 days; 57 (81%) centers reported a LOS between 2 and 4 days in patients who underwent an early-stage gynecologic cancer surgery. The ERAS items with high reported compliance (>75% "normally-always") included deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis (89%), antibiotic prophylaxis (79%), prevention of hypothermia (55%), and early mobilization (55%). The ERAS items that were poorly adhered to (less than 50%) included early removal of urinary catheter (33%), and avoidance of drains (25%). This survey shows broad implementation of ERAS protocols across Europe; however, a wide variation in adherence to the various ERAS protocol items was reported.

Menopausal status, ultrasound and biomarker tests in combination for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in symptomatic women.

Menopausal status, ultrasound and biomarker tests in combination for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in symptomatic women.

World Gynecologic Oncology Day: the use of Twitter to raise awareness of gynecologic cancers

BACKGROUNDSocial media provides an opportunity for people to connect and form communities. This community architecture can help to disseminate health-related information in the form of an awareness campaign. The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology and the European Network of Gynaecological Cancer Advocacy Groups initiated a global campaign, World Gynecologic Oncology Day, on September 20, 2020. We studied and analyzed the impact and reach of this Twitter campaign.OBJECTIVEThis study aimed to assess the impact and reach of the 2020 World Gynecologic Oncology Day Twitter campaign.STUDY DESIGNWe analyzed gynecologic oncology–specific posts (tweets) between 12 am on September 17, 2020, to 11:59 pm on September 25, 2020 (Coordinated Universal Time), covering the days immediately before and after World Gynecological Oncology Day (September 20, 2020), using Tweepy. The European Network of Gynecological Cancer Advocacy Groups suggested hashtags (#GoForPurple, #WorldGODay, and #GoForCheckup) should be used for this social media campaign. We used these hashtags for our data (tweet) collection.RESULTSA total of 382 Twitter accounts participated in this campaign and 662 tweets, including retweets, were reported. Of those, 22% of participants were healthcare professionals. A total of 164 unique hashtags were identified, and #WorldGODay was the most frequently used among the Twitter accounts. #VaginalCancer, #CervicalCancer, and #VulvarCancer were used in relation to the campaign. We identified 5 significant communities that contributed to raising awareness.CONCLUSIONTwitter campaigns should be designed around a single, short, easy-to-spell hashtag and coordinated with previously identified influential accounts using timed tweets. #WorldGOday hashtag was relevant, easy to spell, memorable, and the most effective hashtag used in this campaign.

Robotic surgery in gynaecology: Scientific Impact Paper No. 71 (July 2022).

The use of robotic-assisted keyhole surgery in gynaecology has expanded in recent years owing to technical advances. These include 3D viewing leading to improved depth perception, limitation of tremor, potential for greater precision and discrimination of tissues, a shorter learning curve and improved comfort for surgeons compared with conventional keyhole and open abdominal surgery. Robotic-assisted keyhole surgery, compared with conventional keyhole surgery, improves surgical performance without increasing operating time, minimises blood loss and intra- or postoperative complications, while reducing the need to revert to abdominal surgery. Moreover, surgeons using a robot experience fewer skeletomuscular problems of their own in the short and long term than those operating without a robot as an additional tool. This Scientific Impact Paper looks at the use of a robot in different fields of gynaecological surgery. A robot could be considered safe and a more effective surgical tool than conventional keyhole surgery for women who have to undergo complex gynaecology surgery or have associated medical issues such as body-mass index (BMI) at 30 kg/m2 or above or lung problems. The introduction of the use of robots in keyhole surgery has resulted in a decrease in the number of traditional open surgeries and the risk of conversion to open surgery after traditional keyhole surgery; both of which should be considered when examining the cost-benefit of using a robot. Limitations of robotic-assisted surgery remain the associated higher costs. In womb cancer surgery there is good evidence that introducing robotics into the service improves outcomes for women and may reduce costs.

Sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial cancer: A comparison of main national and international guidelines.

To compare national and international guidelines regarding sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping in endometrial cancer. A descriptive comparative study of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO), the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO), the British Gynecological Cancer Society (BGCS), and the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (JSGO) guidelines. There is a broad consensus that SLN mapping is an appropriate alternative to pelvic lymphadenectomy for uterine-confined endometrioid endometrial cancer (five of five guidelines). It is broadly accepted that a full lymphadenectomy should be performed in case of failed SLN mapping (four of five guidelines), and that mapping with the fluorescent dye indocyanine green is superior to other methods (four of five guidelines). It is agreed that the cervix is the preferable site for dye injection (four of five guidelines), and pathology ultrastaging is advocated by most guidelines (three of five guidelines). Regarding high-risk patients (i.e., high-grade histology and non-endometroid carcinomas), some guidelines accept (three of five), but others currently do not advocate (one of five guidelines), SLN mapping as a sole method for lymph node evaluation. There is no consensus regarding para-aortic lymph node evaluation in pelvic SLN-positive patients. Guidelines for SLN mapping are comparable with regards to surgical technique, ultrastaging, and management in case of failed mapping. Nevertheless, some variations exist regarding the management of high-grade histology and positive pelvic lymph nodes.

Accuracy and effectiveness of HPV mRNA testing in cervical cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cervical cancer screening tests that identify DNA of the main causal agent, high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types, are more protective than cervical cytology. We systematically reviewed the literature to assess whether tests targeting high-risk HPV (hrHPV) mRNA are as accurate and effective as HPV DNA-based screening tests. We did a systematic review to assess the cross-sectional clinical accuracy to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) or 3 or worse (CIN3+) of hrHPV mRNA versus DNA testing in primary cervical cancer screening; the longitudinal clinical performance of cervical cancer screening using hrHPV mRNA versus DNA assays; and the clinical accuracy of hrHPV mRNA testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples. We identified relevant studies published before Aug 1, 2021, through a search of Medline (PubMed), Embase, and CENTRAL. Eligible studies had to contain comparative data addressing one of our three clinical questions. Aggregated data were extracted from selected reports or requested from study authors if necessary. QUADAS and ROBINS-1 tools were used to assess the quality of diagnostic test accuracy studies and cohort studies. To assess cross-sectional clinical accuracy of mRNA testing versus DNA testing and clinical accuracy of hrHPV mRNA testing on self-collected versus clinician collected samples, we applied meta-analytical methods for comparison of diagnostic tests. To assess the longitudinal clinical performance of cervical cancer screening using hrHPV mRNA versus DNA assays, we compared the longitudinal sensitivity of mRNA tests and validated DNA tests for CIN3+ and the relative detection of CIN3+ among women who screened negative for hrHPV mRNA or DNA (both used as measures of safety) at baseline and pooled estimates by years of follow-up. A random-effect model for pooling ratios of proportions or risks was used to summarise longitudinal performance. For the hrHPV mRNA testing with APTIMA HPV Test (APTIMA), the cross-sectional accuracy could be compared with DNA assays on clinician-collected samples in eight studies; longitudinal performance was compared in four studies; and accuracy on self-samples was assessed in five studies. Few reports were retrieved for other mRNA assays, precluding their evaluation in meta-analyses. Compared with validated DNA assays, APTIMA was similarly sensitive (relative sensitivity 0·98 [95% CI 0·95-1·01]) and slightly more specific (1·03 [1·02-1·04]) for CIN2+. The relative sensitivity for CIN3+ was 0·98 (95% CI 0·95-1·01). The longitudinal relative sensitivity for CIN3+ of APTIMA compared with DNA assays assessed over 4-7 years ranged at the study level from 0·91 to 1·05 and in the pooled analysis between 0·95 and 0·98, depending on timepoint, with CIs including or close to unity. The detection rate ratios between 4 and 10 years after baseline negative mRNA versus negative DNA screening were imprecise and heterogeneous among studies, but summary ratios did not differ from unity. In self-collected samples, APTIMA was less sensitive for CIN2+ (relative cross-sectional sensitivity 0·84 [0·74-0·96]) but similarly specific (relative specificity 0·96 [0·91-1·01]) compared with clinician-collected samples. HrHPV RNA testing with APTIMA had similar cross-sectional sensitivity for CIN2+ and CIN3+ and slightly higher specificity than DNA tests. Four studies with 4-7 years of follow-up showed heterogeneous safety outcomes. One study with up to 10 years of follow-up showed no differences in cumulative detection of CIN3+ after negative mRNA versus DNA screening. APTIMA could be accepted for primary cervical cancer screening on clinician-collected cervical samples at intervals of around 5 years. APTIMA is less sensitive on self-collected samples than clinician-collected samples. Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation of the European Commission, through the RISCC Network, WHO, Haute Autorité de la Santé, European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, and the National Institute of Public Health and the Environment.