SUCCOR Nodes: May Sentinel Node Biopsy Determine the Need for Adjuvant Treatment?

Background: The SUCCOR cohort was developed to analyse the overall and disease-free survival at 5 years in women with FIGO 2009 stage IB1 cervical cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the use of adjuvant therapy in these women, depending on the method used to diagnose lymphatic node metastasis. // Patients and Methods: We used data from the SUCCOR cohort, which collected information from 1049 women with FIGO 2009 stage IB1 cervical cancer who were operated on between January 2013 and December 2014 in Europe. We calculated the adjusted proportion of women who received adjuvant therapy depending on the lymph node diagnosis method and compared disease free and overall survival using Cox proportional-hazards regression models. Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for baseline potential confounders. // Results: The adjusted proportion of women who received adjuvant therapy was 33.8% in the sentinel node biopsy + lymphadenectomy (SNB+LA) group and 44.7% in the LA group (p = 0.02), although the proportion of positive nodal status was similar (p = 0.30). That difference was greater in women with negative nodal status and positive Sedlis criteria (difference 31.2%, p = 0.01). Here, those who underwent a SNB+LA had an increased risk of relapse [hazard ratio (HR) 2.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98–6.33, p = 0.056] and risk of death (HR 3.49, 95% CI 1.04–11.7, p = 0.042) compared with those who underwent LA. // Conclusions: Women in this study were less likely to receive adjuvant therapy if their nodal invasion was determined using SNB+LA compared with LA. These results suggest a lack of therapeutic measures available when a negative result is obtained by SNB+LA, which may have an impact on the risk of recurrence and survival

SUCCOR Nodes: May Sentinel Node Biopsy Determine the Need for Adjuvant Treatment?

peer reviewed[en] BACKGROUND: The SUCCOR cohort was developed to analyse the overall and disease-free survival at 5 years in women with FIGO 2009 stage IB1 cervical cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the use of adjuvant therapy in these women, depending on the method used to diagnose lymphatic node metastasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used data from the SUCCOR cohort, which collected information from 1049 women with FIGO 2009 stage IB1 cervical cancer who were operated on between January 2013 and December 2014 in Europe. We calculated the adjusted proportion of women who received adjuvant therapy depending on the lymph node diagnosis method and compared disease free and overall survival using Cox proportional-hazards regression models. Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for baseline potential confounders. RESULTS: The adjusted proportion of women who received adjuvant therapy was 33.8% in the sentinel node biopsy + lymphadenectomy (SNB+LA) group and 44.7% in the LA group (p = 0.02), although the proportion of positive nodal status was similar (p = 0.30). That difference was greater in women with negative nodal status and positive Sedlis criteria (difference 31.2%, p = 0.01). Here, those who underwent a SNB+LA had an increased risk of relapse [hazard ratio (HR) 2.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-6.33, p = 0.056] and risk of death (HR 3.49, 95% CI 1.04-11.7, p = 0.042) compared with those who underwent LA. CONCLUSIONS: Women in this study were less likely to receive adjuvant therapy if their nodal invasion was determined using SNB+LA compared with LA. These results suggest a lack of therapeutic measures available when a negative result is obtained by SNB+LA, which may have an impact on the risk of recurrence and survival

SUCCOR morbidity: complications in minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy in early cervical cancer.

peer reviewed[en] OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of intra-operative and post-operative complications in open and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for patients with early-stage cervical cancer. METHODS: Data were collected from the SUCCOR database of 1272 patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), 2009) who underwent radical hysterectomy in Europe between January 2013 and December 2014. We reviewed the duration of the surgeries, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, intra-operative and post-operative complications. The inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years and histologic type (squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma). Pelvic MRI confirming a tumor diameter ≤4 cm with no parametrial invasion and a pre-operative CT scan, MRI, or positron emission tomography CT demonstrating no extra-cervical metastatic disease were mandatory. Outcomes of interest were any grade >3 adverse events, intra-operative adverse events, post-operative adverse events, length of hospital stay, length of operation, and blood loss. RESULTS: The study included 1156 patients, 633 (54%) in the open surgery group and 523 (46%) in the minimally invasive surgery group. Median age was 46 years (range 18-82), median body mass index 25 kg/m2 (range 15-68), and 1022 (88.3%) patients were considered to have an optimal performance status (ECOG Performance Status 0). The most common histologic tumor type was squamous carcinoma (n=794, 68.7%) and the most frequent FIGO staging was IB1 (n=510, 44.1%). In the minimally invasive surgery group the median duration of surgery was longer (240 vs 187 min, p<0.01), median estimated blood loss was lower (100 vs 300 mL, p<0.01), and median length of hospital stay was shorter (4 vs 7 days, p<0.01) compared with the abdominal surgery group. There was no difference in the overall incidence of intra-operative and post-operative complications between the two groups. Regarding grade I complications, the incidence of vaginal bleeding (2.9% vs 0.6%, p<0.01) and vaginal cuff dehiscence was higher in the minimally invasive surgery group than in the open group (3.3% vs 0.5%, p<0.01). Regarding grade III post-operative complications, bladder dysfunction (1.3% vs 0.2%, p=0.046) and abdominal wall infection (1.1% vs 0%, p=0.018) were more common in the open surgery group than in the minimally invasive surgery group. Ureteral fistula was more frequent in the minimally invasive group than in the open surgery group (1.7% vs 0.5%, p=0.037). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that there was no significant difference in the overall incidence of intra-operative and post-operative complications between minimally invasive radical hysterectomy and the open approach

SUCCOR risk: design and validation of a recurrence prediction index for early-stage cervical cancer

Objective Based on the SUCCOR study database, our primary objective was to identify the independent clinical pathological variables associated with the risk of relapse in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer who underwent a radical hysterectomy. Our secondary goal was to design and validate a risk predictive index (RPI) for classifying patients depending on the risk of recurrence. Methods Overall, 1116 women were included from January 2013 to December 2014. We randomly divided our sample into two cohorts: discovery and validation cohorts. The test group was used to identify the independent variables associated with relapse, and with these variables, we designed our RPI. The index was applied to calculate a relapse risk score for each participant in the validation group. Results A previous cone biopsy was the most significant independent variable that lowered the rate of relapse (odds ratio [OR] 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17-0.60). Additionally, patients with a tumor diameter >2 cm on preoperative imaging assessment (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.33-3.5) and operated by the minimally invasive approach (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.00-2.57) were more likely to have a recurrence. Based on these findings, patients in the validation cohort were classified according to the RPI of low, medium, or high risk of relapse, with rates of 3.4%, 9.8%, and 21.3% observed in each group, respectively. With a median follow-up of 58 months, the 5-year disease-free survival rates were 97.2% for the low-risk group, 88.0% for the medium-risk group, and 80.5% for the high-risk group (p < 0.001). Conclusion Previous conization to radical hysterectomy was the most powerful protective variable of relapse. Our risk predictor index was validated to identify patients at risk of recurrence

SUCCOR cone study : conization before radical hysterectomy

peer reviewed[en] OBJECTIVE: To evaluate disease-free survival of cervical conization prior to radical hysterectomy in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009). METHODS: A multicenter retrospective observational cohort study was conducted including patients from the Surgery in Cervical Cancer Comparing Different Surgical Aproaches in Stage IB1 Cervical Cancer (SUCCOR) database with FIGO 2009 IB1 cervical carcinoma treated with radical hysterectomy between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2014. We used propensity score matching to minimize the potential allocation biases arising from the retrospective design. Patients who underwent conization but were similar for other measured characteristics were matched 1:1 to patients from the non-cone group using a caliper width ≤0.2 standard deviations of the logit odds of the estimated propensity score. RESULTS: We obtained a weighted cohort of 374 patients (187 patients with prior conization and 187 non-conization patients). We found a 65% reduction in the risk of relapse for patients who had cervical conization prior to radical hysterectomy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 0.75, p=0.007) and a 75% reduction in the risk of death for the same sample (HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.90, p=0.033). In addition, patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery without prior conization had a 5.63 times higher chance of relapse compared with those who had an open approach and previous conization (HR 5.63, 95% CI 1.64 to 19.3, p=0.006). Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery with prior conization and those who underwent open surgery without prior conization showed no differences in relapse rates compared with those who underwent open surgery with prior cone biopsy (reference) (HR 1.94, 95% CI 0.49 to 7.76, p=0.349 and HR 2.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 10.86, p=0.106 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, patients undergoing cervical conization before radical hysterectomy had a significantly lower risk of relapse and death

SUCCOR study: An international European cohort observational study comparing minimally invasive surgery versus open abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer

Background Minimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer has demonstrated in recent publications worse outcomes than open surgery. The primary objective of the SUCCOR study, a European, multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study was to evaluate disease-free survival in patients with stage IB1 (FIGO 2009) cervical cancer undergoing open vs minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. As a secondary objective, we aimed to investigate the association between protective surgical maneuvers and the risk of relapse. Methods We obtained data from 1272 patients that underwent a radical hysterectomy by open or minimally invasive surgery for stage IB1 cervical cancer (FIGO 2009) from January 2013 to December 2014. After applying all the inclusion-exclusion criteria, we used an inverse probability weighting to construct a weighted cohort of 693 patients to compare outcomes (minimally invasive surgery vs open). The first endpoint compared disease-free survival at 4.5 years in both groups. Secondary endpoints compared overall survival among groups and the impact of the use of a uterine manipulator and protective closure of the colpotomy over the tumor in the minimally invasive surgery group. Results Mean age was 48.3 years (range; 23-83) while the mean BMI was 25.7 kg/m 2 (range; 15-49). The risk of recurrence for patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery was twice as high as that in the open surgery group (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.35 to 3.15; P=0.001). Similarly, the risk of death was 2.42-times higher than in the open surgery group (HR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.30 to 4.60, P=0.005). Patients that underwent minimally invasive surgery using a uterine manipulator had a 2.76-times higher hazard of relapse (HR, 2.76; 95% CI, 1.75 to 4.33; P&lt;0.001) and those without the use of a uterine manipulator had similar disease-free-survival to the open surgery group (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.79 to 3.15; P=0.20). Moreover, patients that underwent minimally invasive surgery with protective vaginal closure had similar rates of relapse to those who underwent open surgery (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.15 to 2.59; P&lt;0.52). Conclusions Minimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer increased the risk of relapse and death compared with open surgery. In this study, avoiding the uterine manipulator and using maneuvers to avoid tumor spread at the time of colpotomy in minimally invasive surgery was associated with similar outcomes to open surgery. Further prospective studies are warranted. © 2020 International Journal of Gynecological Cance

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

Objective To 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. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, 15 ESGO quality indicators were assessed in the SUCCOR database (patients who underwent radical hysterectomy for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage 2009 IB1, FIGO 2018 IB1, and IB2 cervical cancer between January 2013 and December 2014), and the final score ranged between 0 and 16 points. Centers with more than 13 points were classified as high-quality indicator compliance centers. We constructed a weighted cohort using inverse probability weighting to adjust for the variables. We compared disease-free survival and overall survival using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis in the weighted cohort. Results A total of 838 patients were included in the study. The mean number of quality indicators compliance in this cohort was 13.6 (SD 1.45). A total of 479 (57.2%) patients were operated on at high compliance centers and 359 (42.8%) patients at low compliance centers. High compliance centers performed more open surgeries (58.4% vs 36.7%, p<0.01). Women who were operated on at centers with high compliance with quality indicators had a significantly lower risk of relapse (HR=0.39; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.61; p<0.001). The association was reduced, but remained significant, after further adjustment for conization, surgical approach, and use of manipulator surgery (HR=0.48; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.75; p=0.001) and adjustment for adjuvant therapy (HR=0.47; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.74; p=0.001). Risk of death from disease was significantly lower in women operated on at centers with high adherence to quality indicators (HR=0.43; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.97; p=0.041). However, the association was not significant after adjustment for conization, surgical approach, use of manipulator surgery, and adjuvant therapy. Conclusions Patients with early cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy in centers with high compliance with ESGO quality indicators had a lower risk of recurrence and death