Utility Scores and Treatment Preferences for Clinical Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

AbstractObjectivesTo determine utility scores for health states relevant to the treatment of early-stage, high-risk cervical cancer.MethodsSeven descriptive health states incorporating the physical and emotional aspects of medical treatment, recovery, and prognosis were developed. Forty-five female volunteers valuated each health state using the visual analogue score (VAS) and time trade off (TTO) methods. Treatment options were ranked by mean and median TTO scores. The 95% confidence intervals were calculated to determine the statistical significance of ranking preferences. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare central tendencies related to age, race, parity, and subject history of abnormal cervical cytology.ResultsVAS and TTO scores were highly correlated. Volunteers ranked minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with low-risk features as most preferred (mean TTO = 0.96; median TTO = 1.00) and aborted radical hysterectomy followed by chemoradiation as least preferred (mean TTO = 0.69; median TTO = 0.83). Health states that included radical surgery were ranked higher than those that included chemoradiation, either in the adjuvant or primary setting. When survival was comparable, volunteers rated radical hysterectomy with high-risk pathology followed by adjuvant chemoradiation (mean TTO = 0.78; median TTO = 0.92; 95% CI: 0.69–0.87) similarly to chemoradiation alone (mean TTO = 0.76; median TTO 0.90; 95% CI: 0.66–0.86; p = NS). Utility scores for the majority of health states were not significantly associated with age, race, parity, or subject history of abnormal cervical cytology.ConclusionSubjects consistently preferred surgical excision to treat early-stage, high-risk cervical cancer and chose a minimally invasive approach. Such utility scores can be used to incorporate quality-of-life effects into comparative-effectiveness models for cervical cancer

Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Gynecologic Procedures in a Fellowship Training Program

An early evaluation of the feasibility of training fellows in robotic surgery suggests that it is feasible to incorporate a systematic approach to robotic-assisted laparoscopic training at the onset of incorporating this technology into current practice

HPV genotypes and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in a multiethnic cohort in the southeastern USA

PURPOSE: For poorly understood reasons, invasive cervical cancer (ICC) incidence and mortality rates are higher in women of African descent. Oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes distribution may vary between European American (EA) and African-American (AA) women and may contribute to differences in ICC incidence. The current study aimed at disentangling differences in HPV distribution among AA and EA women. METHODS: Five-hundred and seventy-two women were enrolled at the time of colposcopic evaluation following an abnormal liquid-based cytology screen. HPV infections were detected using HPV linear array, and chi-squared tests and linear regression models were used to compare HPV genotypes across racial/ethnic groups by CIN status. RESULTS: Of the 572 participants, 494 (86 %) had detectable HPV; 245 (43 %) had no CIN lesion, 239 (42 %) had CIN1, and 88 (15 %) had CIN2/3. Seventy-three percent of all women were infected with multiple HPV genotypes. After adjusting for race, age, parity, income, oral contraception use, and current smoking, AAs were two times less likely to harbor HPV 16/18 (OR 0.48, 95 % CI 0.21–0.94, p = 0.03) when all women were considered. This association remained unchanged when only women with CIN2/3 lesions were examined (OR 0.22, 95 % CI 0.05–0.95, p = 0.04). The most frequent high-risk HPV genotypes detected among EAs were 16, 18, 56, 39, and 66, while HPV genotypes 33, 35, 45, 58, and 68 were the most frequent ones detected in AAs. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that while HPV 16/18 are the most common genotypes among EA women with CIN, AAs may harbor different genotypes

Alone Together: Is Strain Experienced Concurrently by Members of Operating Room Teams?: An Event-based Study.

OBJECTIVE To identify which strain episodes are concurrently reported by several team members; to identify triggers of strain experienced by operating room (OR) team members during the intraoperative phase. SUMMARY OR teams are confronted with many sources of strain. However, most studies investigate strain on a general, rather than an event-based level, which does not allow to determine if strain episodes are experienced concurrently by different team members. METHODS We conducted an event-based, observational study, at an academic medical center in North America and included 113 operations performed in 5 surgical departments (general, vascular, pediatric, gynecology, and trauma/acute care). Strain episodes were assessed with a guided-recall method. Immediately after operations, participants mentally recalled the operation, described the strain episodes experienced and their content. RESULTS Based on 731 guided recalls, 461 strain episodes were reported; these refer to 312 unique strain episodes. Overall, 75% of strain episodes were experienced by a single team member only. Among different categories of unique strain episodes, those triggered by task complexity, issues with material, or others' behaviors were typically experienced by 1 team member only. However, acute patient issues (n = 167) and observations of others' strain (n = 12) (respectively, 58.5%; P < 0.001 and 83.3%; P < 0.001) were often experienced by 2 or more team members. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE OR team members are likely to experience strain alone, unless patient safety is at stake. This may jeopardize the building of a shared understanding among OR team members

Performance of sentinel lymph node biopsy in high-risk endometrial cancer

Objective: To determine the rate and performance of sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping among women with high-risk endometrial cancers. Methods: Patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2015 with uterine cancer of grade 3 endometrioid, clear cell, serous or carcinosarcoma histology and who underwent SLN mapping prior to full pelvic lymph node dissection were included. Subjects underwent methylene blue or ICG injection for laparoscopic (N = 16) or robotic-assisted laparoscopic (N = 20) staging. Outcomes included SLN mapping rates, SLN and non-SLN positive rates, false negative SLN algorithm rate, and the negative predictive value (NPV) of the SLN algorithm. Fisher's exact test was used to compare mapping and node positivity rates. Results: 9/36 (25%) patients with high-risk uterine cancer had at least one metastatic lymph node identified. Successful mapping occurred in 30/36 (83%) patients. SLN mapped to pelvic nodes bilaterally in 20 (56%), unilaterally in 9 (25%), and aortic nodes only in 1 (3%). Malignancy was identified in 14/95 (15%) of all sentinel nodes and 12/775 (1.5%) of all non-sentinel nodes (p < 0.001). The false negative rate of SLN mapping alone was 2/26 (7.7%); the NPV was 92.3%. When the SLN algorithm was applied retrospectively the false negative rate was 0/31 (0%); the NPV was 100%. Conclusion: SLN mapping rates for high-risk cancers are slightly lower than in prior reports of lower risk cancers. The NPV of the SLN mapping alone is 92% and rises to 100% when the SLN algorithm is applied. Such results are acceptable and consistent with larger subsets of lower risk endometrial cancers

Doubling down on the future of gynecologic oncology: The SGO future of the profession summit report.

The original vision of the field of gynecologic oncology was to establish a multidisciplinary approach to the management of patients with gynecologic cancers. Fifty years later, scientific advances have markedly changed the overall practice of gynecologic oncology, but the profession continues to struggle to define its value-financial and otherwise. These issues were examined in full at the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) Future of the Profession Summit and the purpose of this document is to summarize the discussion, share the group\u27s perceived strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) for gynecologic oncologists, further educate members and others within the patient care team about the unique role of gynecologic oncologists, and plan future steps in the short- and long- term to preserve the subspecialty\u27s critical mission of providing comprehensive, longitudinal care for people with gynecologic cancers