Objective: ‘The Endometrial Cancer Conservative Treatment (E.C.Co.). A multicentre archive’ is a worldwide project endorsed by the Gynecologic Cancer Inter-Group, aimed at registering conservatively treated endometrial cancer (EC) patients. This paper reports the oncological and reproductive outcomes of intramucous, G2, endometrioid EC patients from this archive. Methods: Twenty-three patients (Stage IA, G2, endometrioid EC) were enrolled between January 2004 and March 2019. Primary and secondary endpoints were, respectively, complete regression (CR) and recurrence rates, and pregnancy and live birth rates. Results: A median follow-up of 35 months (9–148) was achieved. Hysteroscopic resection (HR) plus progestin was adopted in 74% (17/23) of cases. Seventeen patients showed CR (median time to CR, 6 months; 3-13). Among the 6 non-responders, one showed persistence and 5 progressed, all submitted to definitive surgery, with an unfavorauble outcome in one.The recurrence rate was 41.1%. Ten (58.8%) complete responders attempted to conceive, of whom 3 achieved at least one pregnancy with a live-birth. Two out of the 11 candidate patients underwent definitive surgery, while the remaining 9 have so far refused. To date, 22 patients show no evidence of disease, and one is still alive with disease. Conclusions Fertility-sparing treatment seems to be feasible even in G2 EC, although caution should be kept considering the potential pathological undergrading or non-endometrioidhistology misdiagnosis. The low rate of attempt to conceive and of compliance to definitive surgery underline the need for a ‘global’ counselling extended to the follow-up period.

Objective: Uterine serous carcinoma (USC) is a rare highly aggressive disease. In the present study, we aimed to investigate the survival implication of the systematic lymphadenectomy in patients who underwent surgery for apparent early-stage USC. Methods: Consecutive patients with apparent early-stage USC surgically treated at six Italian referral cancer centers were analyzed. A comparison was made between patients who underwent retroperitoneal staging including at least pelvic lymphadenectomy “LND” vs.those who underwent hysterectomy alone “NO-LND”. Baseline, surgical and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Kaplan- Meier curves were calculated for disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). Associations were evaluated with Cox proportional hazard regression and summarized using hazard ratio (HR). Results: One hundred forty patients were analyzed, 106 LND and 34 NO-LND. NO-LND group (compared to LND group) included older patients (median age, 73 vs.67 years) and with higher comorbidities (median Charlson Comorbidity Index, 6 vs. 5) (p<0.001). No differences in terms of recurrence rate (LND vs. NO-LND, 33.1% vs. 41.4%; p=0.240) were observed. At Cox regression analysis lymphadenectomy did not significantly influence DFS (HR=0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.32–1.08; p=0.09), and DSS (HR=0.14; 95% CI=0.02–1.21; multivariable analysis p=0.07). Positive node was independently associated with worse DFS (HR=6.22; 95% CI=3.08–12.60; p<0.001) and DSS (HR=5.51; 95% CI=2.31– 13.10; p<0.001), while adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved DFS (HR=0.38;95% CI=0.17–0.86; p=0.02) and age was independently associated with worse DSS (HR=1.07;95% CI=1.02–1.13; p<0.001). Conclusions Although lymphadenectomy did not show survival benefits in patients who underwent surgery for apparent early-stage USC, the presence of lymph node metastasis was the main adverse prognostic factors, supporting the prognostic role of the retroperitoneal staging also in this histological subtype.

Objective: Total laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (TL-NSRH) has been considered a promising approach, however, surgical, clinical, oncological and functional outcomes have not been systematically addressed. We present a large retrospective multicenter experience comparing TL-NSRH vs. open abdominal NSRH (OA-NSRH) for early and locally-advanced cervical cancer, with particular emphasis on post-surgical pelvic function. Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent class C1-NSRH plus bilateral pelvic + paraaortic lymphadenectomy for stage IA2–IIB cervical cancer at 4 Italian gynecologic oncologic centers (Negrar, Varese, Bologna, Avellino) were enrolled. Patients were divided into TLNSRH and OA-NSRH groups and were investigated with preoperative questionnaires on urinary, rectal and sexual function. Postoperatively, patients filled a questionnaire assessing quality of life, taking into account sexual function and psychological status. Oncological outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meyer method. Results: 301 consecutive patients were included in this study: 170 in the TL-NSRH group and 131 in the OA-NSRH group. Patients in the OA-NSRH group were more likely to experience urinary incontinence and (after 12-months follow-up) urinary retention. No patient in the TL-NSRH group vs. 5 (5.5%) in the OA-NSRH group had complete urinary retention (at the >24-month follow-up [p=0.02]). A total of 20 (11.8%) in the TL-NSRH and 11 (8.4%) patients in the OA-NSRH had recurrence of disease (p=0.44) and 14 (8.2%) and 9 (6.9%) died of disease during follow-up, respectively (p=0.83). Conclusion Our study shows that TL-NSRH is feasible, safe and effective and conjugates adequate radicality and improvement in post-operative functional outcomes. Oncological outcomes of laparoscopic procedures deserve further investigation.

Objective: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused rapid and drastic changes in cancer management. The Italian Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (SIGO), and the Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) promoted a national survey aiming to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on clinical activity of gynecologist oncologists and to assess the implementation of containment measures against COVID-19 diffusion. Methods: The survey consisted of a self-administered, anonymous, online questionnaire. Thesurvey was sent via email to all the members of the SIGO, and MITO groups on April 7, 2020, and was closed on April 20, 2020. Results: Overall, 604 participants completed the questionnaire with a response-rate of 70%. The results of this survey suggest that gynecologic oncology units had set a proactive approach to COVID-19 outbreak. Triage methods were adopted in order to minimize in-hospital diffusion of COVID-19. Only 38% of gynecologic surgeons were concerned about COVID-19 outbreak. Although 73% of the participants stated that COVID-19 has not significantly modified their everyday practice, 21% declared a decrease of the use of laparoscopy in favor of open surgery (19%). However, less than 50% of surgeons adopted specific protection against COVID-19. Additionally, responders suggested to delay cancer treatment (10%–15%), and to perform less radical surgical procedures (20%–25%) during COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions National guidelines should be implemented to further promote the safety of patients and health care providers. International cooperation is of paramount importance, as heavily affected nations can serve as an example to find out ways to safely preserve clinical activity during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Objective: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has correlated with the disruption of screening activities and diagnostic assessments. Endometrial cancer (EC) is one of the most common gynecological malignancies and it is often detected at an early stage, because it frequently produces symptoms. Here, we aim to investigate the impact of COVID-19 outbreak on patterns of presentation and treatment of EC patients. Methods: This is a retrospective study involving 54 centers in Italy. We evaluated patterns of presentation and treatment of EC patients before (period 1: March 1, 2019 to February 29, 2020) and during (period 2: April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021) the COVID-19 outbreak. Results: Medical records of 5,164 EC patients have been retrieved: 2,718 and 2,446 women treated in period 1 and period 2, respectively. Surgery was the mainstay of treatment in both periods (p=0.356). Nodal assessment was omitted in 689 (27.3%) and 484 (21.2%) patients treated in period 1 and 2, respectively (p<0.001). While, the prevalence of patients undergoing sentinel node mapping (with or without backup lymphadenectomy) has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic (46.7% in period 1 vs. 52.8% in period 2; p<0.001). Overall, 1,280 (50.4%) and 1,021 (44.7%) patients had no adjuvant therapy in period 1 and 2, respectively (p<0.001). Adjuvant therapy use has increased during COVID-19 pandemic (p<0.001). Conclusion Our data suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the characteristics and patterns of care of EC patients. These findings highlight the need to implement healthcare services during the pandemic.