Perspectives, fears and expectations of patients with gynaecological cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Pan-European study of the European Network of Gynaecological Cancer Advocacy Groups (ENGAGe)

"Artículo escrito por un elevado número de autores, solo se referencian el que aparece en primer lugar, el nombre del grupo de colaboración, si le hubiere, y los autores pertenecientes a la UAM".Background: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on European gynaecological cancer patients under active treatment or follow-up has not been documented. We sought to capture the patient perceptions of the COVID-19 implications and the worldwide imposed treatment modifications. Methods: A patient survey was conducted in 16 European countries, using a new COVID-19-related questionnaire, developed by ENGAGe and the Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale questionnaire (HADS). The survey was promoted by national patient advocacy groups and charitable organisations. Findings: We collected 1388 forms; 592 online and 796 hard-copy (May, 2020). We excluded 137 due to missing data. Median patients’ age was 55 years (range: 18–89), 54.7% had ovarian cancer and 15.5% were preoperative. Even though 73.2% of patients named cancer as a risk factor for COVID-19, only 17.5% were more afraid of COVID-19 than their cancer condition, with advanced age (>70 years) as the only significant risk factor for that. Overall, 71% were concerned about cancer progression if their treatment/follow-up was cancelled/postponed. Most patients (64%) had their care continued as planned, but 72.3% (n = 892) said that they received no information around overall COVID-19 infection rates of patients and staff, testing or measures taken in their treating hospital. Mean HADS Anxiety and Depression Scores were 8.8 (range: 5.3–12) and 8.1 (range: 3.8–13.4), respectively. Multivariate analysis identified high HADS-depression scores, having experienced modifications of care due to the pandemic and concern about not being able to visit their doctor as independent predictors of patients’ anxiety. Interpretation: Gynaecological cancer patients expressed significant anxiety about progression of their disease due to modifications of care related to the COVID-19 pandemic and wished to pursue their treatment as planned despite the associated risks. Healthcare professionals should take this into consideration when making decisions that impact patients care in times of crisis and to develop initiatives to improve patients’ communication and education

Undifferentiated round cell sarcoma of the broad ligament

Sarcomas of the broad ligament are very uncommon. To our knowledge, there are no cases published of undifferentiated round cell sarcoma of the broad ligament. Round cell sarcomas are a rare and very aggressive variant, which due to their sensitivity to chemotherapy, have an acceptable prognosis. We report the case of a 27-year-old woman who presented with a pelvic mass with a 7-cm diameter placed on the right broad ligament. After surgery, she was diagnosed with undifferentiated round cell sarcoma of the broad ligament. The patient received adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and after 12 years of follow-up, she still remains asymptomatic. Proper differential diagnoses as well as an appropriate adjuvant therapy after surgical treatment seem to be essential to obtain good oncological outcomes in this rare entit

Management of borderline ovarian tumours: A comprehensive review of the literature

Borderline ovarian tumours differ from epithelial ovarian cancer by their low incidence, frequent association with infertility, low association with mutations in BCRA genes, different percentages of the most common histological types, early stage diagnosis, and high survival rate, even when associated with peritoneal involvement. They occur in younger women, which is why one of the objectives in these patients will be the preservation of fertility. The management of these tumours has been widely discussed and still continues to be controversial. The latest findings underscore the importance of full staging in both radical and conservative surgery, to choose the most comprehensive treatment and obtain an accurate prognosis. One of the objectives of this article shall be the in-depth review of the indications, benefits, and disadvantages of each type of surgery, as well as the usefulness of the medical treatment. In addition, the article aims to review follow-up guidelines and to clarify the main prognostic factors that affect recurrence and survival of these patients

Sentinel Lymph Node Detection in Early Stage Cervical Cancer

Worldwide, cervical cancer is the fourth most common malignancy among women. Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy is the standard treatment for early stage cervical cancer. If lymph node metastasis is present at the time of diagnosis, 5-year survival rate drops from 90% to 57%. The risk of lymph node metastases in women with early stage cervical cancer is approximately 15%, and determines the use of adjuvant treatment. Over 80% of patients do not benefit from pelvic lymphadenectomy, but may suffer from adverse complications or sequelae such as lymphedema, lymphocyst formation, and neurovascular and ureteral injury. The sentinel lymph node is the first node to which metastatic disease will spread from a primary tumor. The clinical benefits of biopsy of only the sentinel lymph node includes a significant reduction in the adverse effects of complete lymphadenectomy. The specific benefits of sentinel lymph node detection in early stage cervical cancer includes improved identification of metastatic lymph nodes through ultrastaging and identification of alternate lymph node drainage sites, as well as the possibility of intraoperative frozen section analysis, which may be used to guide surgical management. Sentinel lymph node detection in early stage cervical cancer could become the standard of care in the near future

Vaginal laparoscopically assisted radical trachelectomy in cervical clear cell adenocarcinoma

Adenocarcinoma of the cervix is a rare condition that has shown an increase in incidence, especially in the 20- to 34-year-old group. Adenocarcinoma represents about 5–10% of all tumours in this area, and, among these, the clear cell type accounts for 4–9%. This type of tumour affects mainly postmenopausal women but also occurs in young women with a history of prenatal exposure to diethylstilbestrol (DES). The prognosis for adenocarcinoma of the cervix is poor overall and worse for the clear cell variety. This article discusses a case of clear cell adenocarcinoma of the cervix, unrelated to intrauterine exposure to DES, in a woman of childbearing age who wished to preserve her fertility and was therefore treated by radical vaginal trachelectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy

Laparoscopic management of a cavitated noncommunicating rudimentary uterine horn of a unicornuate uterus: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>A unicornuate uterus with a rudimentary horn is the most uncommon uterine anomaly of the female genital tract. It has an estimated frequency of one in 100,000 among the fertile female population. This anomaly results from the abnormal maturation of one Müllerian duct with the normal development of the contralateral one.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We report here the case of a 14-year-old Caucasian girl who came to our hospital with intense dysmenorrhea. Imaging techniques revealed a unicornuate uterus with a rudimentary horn and a large hematosalpinx. We performed a laparoscopic removal of this uterine anomaly without any complication in the postoperative period.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In our case report, we demonstrate that laparoscopy is the best approach for the treatment of IIb Müllerian abnormalities. Laparoscopy resulted in anatomical and reproductive results equivalent to those offered by a laparotomic approach, but with the additional advantages of minimally invasive surgery, such as better cosmetic results and postoperative period, which are essential for very young patients.</p

Gynecologic cancers in pregnancy: guidelines based on a third international consensus meeting

We aimed to provide comprehensive protocols and promote effective management of pregnant women with gynecological cancers. New insights and more experience have been gained since the previous guidelines were published in 2014. Members of the International Network on Cancer, Infertility and Pregnancy (INCIP), in collaboration with other international experts, reviewed existing literature on their respective areas of expertise. Summaries were subsequently merged into a manuscript that served as a basis for discussion during the consensus meeting. Treatment of gynecological cancers during pregnancy is attainable if management is achieved by collaboration of a multidisciplinary team of health care providers. This allows further optimization of maternal treatment, while considering fetal development and providing psychological support and long-term follow-up of the infants. Nonionizing imaging procedures are preferred diagnostic procedures, but limited ionizing imaging methods can be allowed if indispensable for treatment plans. In contrast to other cancers, standard surgery for gynecological cancers often needs to be adapted according to cancer type and gestational age. Most standard regimens of chemotherapy can be administered after 14 weeks gestational age but are not recommended beyond 35 weeks. C-section is recommended for most cervical and vulvar cancers, whereas vaginal delivery is allowed in most ovarian cancers. Breast-feeding should be avoided with ongoing chemotherapeutic, endocrine or targeted treatment. More studies that focus on the long-term toxic effects of gynecologic cancer treatments are needed to provide a full understanding of their fetal impact. In particular, data on targeted therapies that are becoming standard of care in certain gynecological malignancies is still limited. Furthermore, more studies aimed at the definition of the exact prognosis of patients after antenatal cancer treatment are warranted. Participation in existing registries (www.cancerinpregnancy.org) and the creation of national tumor boards with multidisciplinary teams of care providers (supplementary Box S1, available at Annals of Oncology online) is encouraged

ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer - Update 2023∗

In 2018, the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO) jointly with the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) published evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Given the large body of new evidence addressing the management of cervical cancer, the three sister societies jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines. The update includes new topics to provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in cervical cancer.To serve on the expert panel (27 experts across Europe) ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated practicing clinicians who are involved in managing patients with cervical cancer and have demonstrated leadership through their expertise in clinical care and research, national and international engagement, profile, and dedication to the topics addressed. To ensure the statements were evidence based, new data 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 international development group. Before publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 155 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives.These updated guidelines are comprehensive and cover staging, management, follow-up, long-term survivorship, quality of life and palliative care. Management includes fertility sparing treatment, early and locally advanced cervical cancer, invasive cervical cancer diagnosed on a simple hysterectomy specimen, cervical cancer in pregnancy, rare tumors, recurrent and metastatic diseases. The management algorithms and the principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined

ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer – Update 2023*

Funding Information: Open access publishing supported by the National Technical Library in Prague. Funding Information: The authors thank ESGO, ESTRO, and ESP for their support. The authors also thank the 155 international reviewers (physicians and patient representatives, see Appendix 2 ) for their valuable comments and suggestions. The authors thank the ESGO office, especially Kamila Macku, Tereza Cicakova, and Kateřina Šibravová, provided invaluable logistical and administrative support throughout the process. Publisher Copyright: © 2023, ESGO, ESTRO, ESP.In 2018, the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO) jointly with the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) published evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Given the large body of new evidence addressing the management of cervical cancer, the three sister societies jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines. The update includes new topics to provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in cervical cancer. To serve on the expert panel (27 experts across Europe) ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated practicing clinicians who are involved in managing patients with cervical cancer and have demonstrated leadership through their expertise in clinical care and research, national and international engagement, profile, and dedication to the topics addressed. To ensure the statements were evidence based, new data 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 international development group. Before publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 155 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. These updated guidelines are comprehensive and cover staging, management, follow-up, long-term survivorship, quality of life and palliative care. Management includes fertility sparing treatment, early and locally advanced cervical cancer, invasive cervical cancer diagnosed on a simple hysterectomy specimen, cervical cancer in pregnancy, rare tumors, recurrent and metastatic diseases. The management algorithms and the principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined.publishersversionpublishe

ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer – Update 2023

Funding Information: The authors thank ESGO, ESTRO, and ESP for their support. The authors also thank the 155 international reviewers (physicians and patient representatives, see Appendix 2 in Online Supplemental File 2) for their valuable comments and suggestions. The authors thank the ESGO office, especially Kamila Macku, Tereza Cicakova, and Kateřina Šibravová, provided invaluable logistical and administrative support throughout the process. The development group (including all authors) is collectively responsible for the decision to submit for publication. DC (chair), JL (chair), MRR (chair) and FP (methodologist) wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All other contributors have actively given personal input, reviewed the manuscript, and have given final approval before submission. DC is responsible for the overall content as the guarantor. Initiated through the ESGO the decision to develop multidisciplinary guidelines was made jointly by the ESGO, ESTRO, and ESP. The ESGO provided administrative support. The ESGO, ESTRO and ESP are nonprofit knowledgeable societies. *These guidelines were developed by ESGO, ESTRO and ESP and are published in the Int J Gynecol Cancer, Radiother Oncol and Virchows Archiv. CCh has reported advisory boards for GSK, MSD and EISAI; SFL has reported advisory boards for MSD, GSK, AstraZeneca and Novartis; DL has reported consultant honoria from AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD, Immunogen, Genmab, Amgen, Seagen and PharmaMar, advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Merck Serono, Seagen, Immunogen, Genmab, Oncoinvest, Corcept and Sutro, research institutional funding from Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD and PharmaMar, research sponsored by AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Genmab, GSK, Immunogen, Incyte, MSD, Roche, Seagen and Novartis, and speakers’ bureau activities for AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD and PharmaMar; UM has reported advisory boards for AstraZeneca (Steering committee member for CALLA Study); RN has reported research grants from Elekta, Varian, Accuray, Dutch Research Council, and Dutch Cancer Society; AO has reported personal fees for advisory board membersip from Agenus, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Corcept Therapeutics, Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, Eisai, EMD Serono, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genmab/Seagen, GSK, ImmunoGen, Itheos, Merck Sharp & Dohme de Espana, SA, Mersana Thereapeutics, Novocure, PharmaMar, piIME Oncology, Roche, Sattucklabs, Sutro Biopharma and Tesaro, and personal fees for travel/accomodation from AstraZeneca, PharmaMar and Roche; DQ has reported advisory boards for Mimark inc; MPS has reported research grants and personal fees for workshops from Elekta AB; DC, MRR, FP, CC, AF, DF, DJK, FJ, CK, PM, RN, FPec, JP, SR, AS, VS, KT, IZ and JCL have reported no conflicts of interest. Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed. Not applicable. Not applicable. David Cibula, Maria Rosaria Raspollini, François Planchamp, Carlos Centeno, Cyrus Chargari, Ana Felix, Daniela Fischerova, Daniela Jahn-Kuch, Florence Joly, Christhardt Kohler, Sigurd F. Lax, Domenica Lorusso, Umesh Mahantshetty, Patrice Mathevet, Raj Naik, Remi Nout, Ana Oaknin, Fedro Peccatori, Jan Persson, Denis Querleu, Sandra Rubio, Maximilian Paul Schmid, Artem Stepanyan, Valentyn Svintsitskyi, Karl Tamussino, Ignacio Zapardiel, Jacob Christian Lindegaard. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Funding Information: CCh has reported advisory boards for GSK, MSD and EISAI; SFL has reported advisory boards for MSD, GSK, AstraZeneca and Novartis; DL has reported consultant honoria from AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD, Immunogen, Genmab, Amgen, Seagen and PharmaMar, advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Merck Serono, Seagen, Immunogen, Genmab, Oncoinvest, Corcept and Sutro, research institutional funding from Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD and PharmaMar, research sponsored by AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Genmab, GSK, Immunogen, Incyte, MSD, Roche, Seagen and Novartis, and speakers’ bureau activities for AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD and PharmaMar; UM has reported advisory boards for AstraZeneca (Steering committee member for CALLA Study); RN has reported research grants from Elekta, Varian, Accuray, Dutch Research Council, and Dutch Cancer Society; AO has reported personal fees for advisory board membersip from Agenus, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Corcept Therapeutics, Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, Eisai, EMD Serono, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genmab/Seagen, GSK, ImmunoGen, Itheos, Merck Sharp & Dohme de Espana, SA, Mersana Thereapeutics, Novocure, PharmaMar, piIME Oncology, Roche, Sattucklabs, Sutro Biopharma and Tesaro, and personal fees for travel/accomodation from AstraZeneca, PharmaMar and Roche; DQ has reported advisory boards for Mimark inc; MPS has reported research grants and personal fees for workshops from Elekta AB; DC, MRR, FP, CC, AF, DF, DJK, FJ, CK, PM, RN, FPec, JP, SR, AS, VS, KT, IZ and JCL have reported no conflicts of interest. Publisher Copyright: © 2023 ESGO, ESTRO, ESPIn 2018, the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO) jointly with the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) published evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Given the large body of new evidence addressing the management of cervical cancer, the three sister societies jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines. The update includes new topics to provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in cervical cancer. To serve on the expert panel (27 experts across Europe) ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated practicing clinicians who are involved in managing patients with cervical cancer and have demonstrated leadership through their expertise in clinical care and research, national and international engagement, profile, and dedication to the topics addressed. To ensure the statements were evidence based, new data 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 international development group. Before publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 155 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. These updated guidelines are comprehensive and cover staging, management, follow-up, long-term survivorship, quality of life and palliative care. Management includes fertility sparing treatment, early and locally advanced cervical cancer, invasive cervical cancer diagnosed on a simple hysterectomy specimen, cervical cancer in pregnancy, rare tumors, recurrent and metastatic diseases. The management algorithms and the principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined.publishersversionpublishe