OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present retrospective population-based study was to investigate the oncologic impact of uterine and ovarian preservation (OP) in premenopausal women with stage IA or IC ovarian clear cell carcinoma (OCCC). METHODS: The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was accessed and a cohort of surgically-staged premenopausal women (age <50 years) diagnosed with unilateral stage IA or IC OCCC was drawn. Based on site-specific surgery codes, women who did not undergo hysterectomy and/or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) were identified. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates were calculated following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves; comparisons were made with the log-rank test. Multivariate Cox analysis was performed to control for possible confounders. RESULTS: A total of 741 premenopausal women who met the inclusion criteria were identified. Based on available information, rate of uterine preservation was 14.5% (96/663) while the rate of OP was 28.1% (71/253). Five-year CSS rates were 90.8% for women who did not undergo hysterectomy compared with 87.7% for those who did (p=0.290). Similarly, 5-year CSS rates in the OP and BSO groups were 92.6% and 85%, respectively (p=0.060). After controlling for disease sub-stage (IA vs. IC), uterine or OP was not associated with a worse overall or cancer-specific mortality. CONCLUSION: In the present cohort, uterine and OP did not have a negative impact on oncologic outcomes. Selection criteria for fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) could be expanded to include women with stage IA OCCC.
Adenocarcinoma, Clear Cell ; Cohort Studies ; Epidemiology ; Female ; Fertility ; Fertility Preservation ; Humans ; Hysterectomy ; Mortality ; Ovarian Neoplasms ; Patient Selection ; Retrospective Studies

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the oncologic safety of ovarian preservation (OP) in premenopausal women diagnosed with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I uterine sarcoma. METHODS: The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was accessed and a cohort of women aged ≤50 diagnosed between 1988–2013 with a sarcoma limited to the uterus was drawn. Based on site-specific surgery codes, women who underwent hysterectomy with or without oophorectomy and did not receive radiation therapy were selected for further analysis. Overall (OS) and cancer-specific (CSS) survival were determined following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves; comparisons were made with the log-rank test. A Cox-proportional hazard model was constructed to control for possible confounders. RESULTS: A total of 1,482 women were included in the analysis; 800 (54.0%) were diagnosed with leiomyosarcoma (LMS), 520 (35.1%) with low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LG-ESS), and 162 (10.9%) with adenosarcoma (AS). The OP group included 418 women (28.2%). Differences in the rate of OP were noted based on histology (p=0.014), year of diagnosis (p=0.001), patient age (p<0.001) and race (p=0.012). There was no difference in OS (p=0.220) or CSS (p=0.210) between women who had OP and those who did not. Multivariate analysis confirmed that OP was not associated with a worse mortality. CONCLUSION: In this population-based cohort of women with sarcoma limited to the uterus, OP was not associated with worse oncologic outcomes. OP could be considered for women with LMS, sparing them from the morbidity associated with iatrogenic menopause. No conclusions could be made for those with LG-ESS or AS.
Adenosarcoma ; Cohort Studies ; Continental Population Groups ; Diagnosis ; Epidemiology ; Female ; Gynecology ; Humans ; Hysterectomy ; Leiomyosarcoma ; Menopause ; Mortality ; Multivariate Analysis ; Obstetrics ; Ovariectomy ; Proportional Hazards Models ; Sarcoma* ; Sarcoma, Endometrial Stromal ; Uterus

OBJECTIVE: To compare gynecological cancer risk management between women with BRCA variants of unknown significance (VUS) to women with negative genetic testing METHODS: Ninety-nine patients whose BRCA genetic testing yielded VUS were matched with 99 control patients with definitive negative BRCA results at a single institution. Demographics and risk management decisions were obtained through chart review. Primary outcome was the rate of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO). Chi square tests, t-tests, and logistic regression were performed, with significance of p<0.05. RESULTS: VUS patients were more likely to be non-Caucasian (p=0.000) and of Ashkenazi-Jewish descent (p=0.000). There was no difference in gynecologic oncology referrals or recommendations to screen or undergo risk-reducing surgery for VUS vs. negative patients. Ultimately, 44 patients (22%) underwent RRBSO, with no significant difference in surgical rate based on the presence of VUS. Ashkenazi-Jewish descent was associated with a 4.5 times increased risk of RRBSO (OR=4.489; 95% CI=1.484–13.579) and family history of ovarian cancer was associated with a 2.6 times risk of RRBSO (OR=2.641; 95% CI=1.107–6.299). CONCLUSION: In our institution, patients with VUS were surgically managed similarly to those with negative BRCA testing. The numbers of patients with VUS are likely to increase with the implementation of multi-gene panel testing. Our findings underscore the importance of genetic counseling and individualized screening and prevention strategies in the management of genetic testing results.
Demography ; Female ; Genetic Counseling ; Genetic Testing ; Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome ; Humans ; Logistic Models ; Mass Screening ; Ovarian Neoplasms ; Referral and Consultation ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Management