OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of the impact of sequential chemoradiotherapy in high risk endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS: Two hundred fifty-four women with stage IB grade 3, II and III EC (2009 FIGO staging), were included in this retrospective study. RESULTS: Stage I, II, and III was 24%, 28.7%, and 47.3%, respectively. Grade 3 tumor was 53.2% and 71.3% had deep myometrial invasion. One hundred sixty-five women (65%) underwent pelvic (+/- aortic) lymphadenectomy and 58 (22.8%) had nodal metastases. Ninety-eight women (38.6%) underwent radiotherapy, 59 (23.2%) chemotherapy, 42 (16.5%) sequential chemoradiotherapy, and 55 (21.7%) were only observed. After a median follow-up of 101 months, 78 women (30.7%) relapsed and 91 women (35.8%) died. Sequential chemoradiotherapy improved survival rates in women who did not undergo nodal evaluation (disease-free survival [DFS], p=0.040; overall survival [OS], p=0.024) or pelvic (+/- aortic) lymphadenectomy (DFS, p=0.008; OS, p=0.021). Sequential chemoradiotherapy improved both DFS (p=0.015) and OS (p=0.014) in stage III, while only a trend was found for DFS (p=0.210) and OS (p=0.102) in stage I-II EC. In the multivariate analysis, only age (< or =65 years) and sequential chemoradiotherapy were statistically related to the prognosis. CONCLUSION: Sequential chemoradiotherapy improves survival rates in high risk EC compared with chemotherapy or radiotherapy alone, in particular in stage III.
Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Chemoradiotherapy/*methods ; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/methods ; Endometrial Neoplasms/*therapy ; Female ; Humans ; Laparoscopy/methods ; Lymph Node Excision/methods ; Lymphatic Metastasis ; Middle Aged ; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant/methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Treatment Outcome ; Young Adult

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy in the developed countries. Although the high incidence of this occurrence no consensus, about the role of retroperitoneal staging, still exists. Growing evidence support the safety and efficacy of sentinel lymph node mapping. This technique is emerging as a new standard for endometrial cancer staging procedures. In the present paper, we discuss the role of sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial cancer, highlighting the most controversies features.
Endometrial Neoplasms/*pathology/surgery ; Female ; Humans ; Hysteroscopy/methods ; Injections, Intralesional ; Lymph Node Excision/*methods ; Lymphatic Metastasis ; *Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy/methods

No abstract available.
Female ; Humans ; Leiomyoma/*surgery ; *Morcellation/adverse effects ; Risk Assessment ; United States ; United States Food and Drug Administration ; Uterine Neoplasms/*surgery

No abstract available.
Female ; Humans ; Leiomyoma/*surgery ; *Morcellation/adverse effects ; Risk Assessment ; United States ; United States Food and Drug Administration ; Uterine Neoplasms/*surgery

No abstract available.
Endometrial Neoplasms/*pathology ; Female ; Humans ; Lymph Node Excision/*methods ; *Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy

The World Health Organization (WHO) classified the novel coronavirus (i.e., coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) as a global public health emergency. COVID-19 threatens to curtail patient access to evidence-based treatment. Medicine is changing, basically due to the limited available resources. In the field of gynecologic oncology, we have to re-design our treatments' paradigm. During COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, the highest priority is to achieve the maximum benefit from less demanding procedures. Extensive procedures should be avoided, in order to reduce hospitalization and postoperative events that might increase the in-hospital spread of the virus. There are ongoing concerns on the use of laparoscopic procedures, related to the possible contamination of the staff working in the operation room.Other minimally invasive techniques, including, vaginal surgery as well as robotic-assisted and isobaric procedures would be preferred over laparoscopy. A fair allocation of resources is paramount adequate treatments.

OBJECTIVE: To test the applicability of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) and Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) criteria in predicting complete cytoreduction (CC) in patients undergoing secondary cytoreductive surgery (SCS) for recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC). METHODS: Data of consecutive patients undergoing SCS were reviewed. The Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie OVARian cancer study group (AGO-OVAR) and MSK criteria were retrospectively applied. Nomograms, based on AGO criteria, MSK criteria and both AGO and MSK criteria were built in order to assess the probability to achieve CC at SCS. RESULTS: Overall, 194 patients met the inclusion criteria. CC was achieved in 161 (82.9%) patients. According to the AGO-OVAR criteria, we observed that CC was achieved in 87.0% of patients with positive AGO score. However, 45 out of 71 (63.4%) patients who did not fulfilled the AGO score had CC. Similarly, CC was achieved in 87.1%, 61.9% and 66.7% of patients for whom SCS was recommended, had to be considered and was not recommended, respectively. In order to evaluate the predictive value of the AGO-OVAR and MSK criteria we built 2 separate nomograms (c-index: 0.5900 and 0.5989, respectively) to test the probability to achieve CC at SCS. Additionally, we built a nomogram using both the aforementioned criteria (c-index: 0.5857). CONCLUSION: The AGO and MSK criteria help identifying patients deserving SCS. However, these criteria might be strict, thus prohibiting a beneficial treatment in patients who do not met these criteria. Further studies are needed to clarify factors predicting CC at SCS.
Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures ; Humans ; Nomograms ; Ovarian Neoplasms* ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies

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.