The rationale of opportunistic bilateral salpingectomies (OBS) during benign gynaecological and obstetric surgery : a consensus text of the Flemish Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (VVOG)

Ovarian cancer (OC), is a disease difficult to diagnose in an early stage implicating a poor prognosis. The 5-year overall survival in Belgium has not changed in the last 18 years and remains 44 %. There is no effective screening method (secondary prevention) to detect ovarian cancer at an early stage. Primary prevention of ovarian cancer came in the picture through the paradigm shift that the fallopian tube is often the origin of ovarian cancer and not the ovary itself. Opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy (OBS) during benign gynaecological and obstetric surgery might have the potential to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer by as much as 65 %. Bilateral risk-reducing salpingectomy during a benign procedure is feasible, safe, appears to have no impact on the ovarian function and seems to be cost effective. The key question is whether we should wait for a RCT or implement OBS directly in our daily practice. Guidelines regarding OBS within our societies are therefore urgently needed. Our recommendation is to inform all women without a child wish, undergoing a benign gynaecological or obstetrical surgical procedure about the pro’s and the con’s of OBS and advise a bilateral salpingectomy. Furthermore, there is an urgent need for a prospective registry of OBS. The present article is the consensus text of the Flemish Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (VVOG) regarding OBS

BD-ProExC as adjunct molecular marker for improved detection of <tex>CIN2^{+}$</tex> after HPV primary screening

Background and Methods: We investigated the efficacy of 8 cervical cancer screening strategies relative to cytology with emphasis on immunocytochemical detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)- induced cell transformation (BD-ProExC) as a tool of triage following primary cytology or hrHPV testing. 3,126 women were tested with BD-SurePath liquid-based cytology, hrHPV PCR genotyping and BD-ProExC immunostaining, and colposcopy verification to calculate sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2(+)). Results: Compared to cytology screening, double testing with cytology and hrHPV resulted in the same sensitivity with a significant increase in the PPV (relative PPV: 1.83). However, twice as many tests were needed. Cytology with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) triage and hrHPV testing showed comparative results to double testing requiring only a small increase in number of tests. Screening for hrHPV subtypes 16/18, and ASC-US triage with hrHPV16/18 resulted in significant reductions in sensitivity (ratio: 0.74 and 0.96, respectively). Primary hrHPV/BD-ProExC screening was significantly more sensitive (ratio: 1.63/1.33), but had a significantly lower PPV (ratio: 0.64/0.88). ASC-US triage by BD-ProExC increased the PPV (ratio: 1.90) but decreased the sensitivity (ratio: 0.96). Primary hrHPV screening followed by BD-ProExC triage, led to significant increases in sensitivity (ratio: 1.30) and PPV (ratio: 2.89), and resulted in 55% fewer referrals for colposcopy. Conclusions: From the investigated screening strategies, primary hrHPV DNA-based screening followed by BD-ProExC triage was determined to be the best screening strategy. Impact: Immunocytological triage could be used to perfect hrHPV primary screening

A cross-sectional, multicentre, epidemiological study on human papillomavirus (HPV) type distribution in adult women diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer in Belgium

Objective: Despite an advanced national cervical cancer screening and vaccination programme cervical cancer is still the third most frequent diagnosed gynaecological tumour in Belgium. The goal of this study is to present the Belgian data of a cross-sectional, multicentre, epidemiological study on human papillomavirus (HPV) type distribution in adult women diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer (ICC) conducted in 12 European countries. Material and Methods: Centres in four major Belgian cities (Antwerp, Brussels, Ghent and Liège) participated in this study. Tissue samples from women with ICC were collected from the period 2001 - 2008. All slides were centrally reviewed and analysed for HPV. The total enrolled cohort included 278 subjects. Results: The histologically eligible cohort comprised of 255 patients (mean age 51.3 ± 15.1 years) and 237 were confirmed HPV positive (mean age 50.6 ± 14.9 years). A single HPV infection was present in 95.8%. The five most frequent HPV types were HPV 16 (68.7%), HPV18 (12.3%), HPV 31 (6.2%), HPV 33 (5.3%) and HPV 45 (1.8%). Multiple HPV types were present in 3.4%, with two HPV types in 2.5% and three HPV types in 0.8%. In the various HPV type combinations observed in multiple infected women, HPV 31 (62.5%) and HPV 33 (50.0%) were the most frequent. The ratio of adenocarcinoma (ADC) versus squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) cases in the histologically eligible cohort was 1:8. Compared to the pooled European data the Belgium HPV 16 is 1.1, HPV 33 is 1.2 and HPV 31 is 1.7 higher and the HPV 18 is 0.8 and HPV 45 is 0.34 lower. Conclusion: The 5 most frequent HPV types in Belgium are the same as in the rest of Europe, but the distribution is different. Cervical cancer screening should therefore be HPV type specific and HPV prophylactic vaccination should also focus on other types then HPV 16 and HPV 18. A national registry is needed in order to follow the trends of HPV types in the society and to measure the impact of prevention, for which the data presented in this study can be an important basis