1.Adjuvant sequential chemo and radiotherapy improves the oncological outcome in high risk endometrial cancer.
Mauro SIGNORELLI ; Andrea Alberto LISSONI ; Elena DE PONTI ; Tommaso GRASSI ; Serena PONTI ; Robert FRUSCIO
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 2015;26(4):284-292
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
2.Characteristics and patterns of care of endometrial cancer before and during COVID-19 pandemic
Giorgio BOGANI ; Giovanni SCAMBIA ; Chiara CIMMINO ; Francesco FANFANI ; Barbara COSTANTINI ; Matteo LOVERRO ; Gabriella FERRANDINA ; Fabio LANDONI ; Luca BAZZURINI ; Tommaso GRASSI ; Domenico VITOBELLO ; Gabriele SIESTO ; Anna Myriam PERRONE ; Vanna ZANAGNOLO ; Pierandrea DE IACO ; Francesco MULTINU ; Fabio GHEZZI ; Jvan CASARIN ; Roberto BERRETTA ; Vito A CAPOZZI ; Errico ZUPI ; Gabriele CENTINI ; Antonio PELLEGRINO ; Silvia CORSO ; Guido STEVENAZZI ; Serena MONTOLI ; Anna Chiara BOSCHI ; Giuseppe COMERCI ; Pantaleo GRECO ; Ruby MARTINELLO ; Francesco SOPRACORDEVOLE ; Giorgio GIORDA ; Tommaso SIMONCINI ; Marta CARETTO ; Enrico SARTORI ; Federico FERRARI ; Antonio CIANCI ; Giuseppe SARPIETRO ; Maria Grazia MATARAZZO ; Fulvio ZULLO ; Giuseppe BIFULCO ; Michele MORELLI ; Annamaria FERRERO ; Nicoletta BIGLIA ; Fabio BARRA ; Simone FERRERO ; Umberto Leone Roberti MAGGIORE ; Stefano CIANCI ; Vito CHIANTERA ; Alfredo ERCOLI ; Giulio SOZZI ; Angela MARTOCCIA ; Sergio SCHETTINI ; Teresa ORLANDO ; Francesco G CANNONE ; Giuseppe ETTORE ; Andrea PUPPO ; Martina BORGHESE ; Canio MARTINELLI ; Ludovico MUZII ; Violante Di DONATO ; Lorenza DRIUL ; Stefano RESTAINO ; Alice BERGAMINI ; Giorgio CANDOTTI ; Luca BOCCIOLONE ; Francesco PLOTTI ; Roberto ANGIOLI ; Giulia MANTOVANI ; Marcello CECCARONI ; Chiara CASSANI ; Mattia DOMINONI ; Laura GIAMBANCO ; Silvia AMODEO ; Livio LEO ; Raphael THOMASSET ; Diego RAIMONDO ; Renato SERACCHIOLI ; Mario MALZONI ; Franco GORLERO ; Martina Di LUCA ; Enrico BUSATO ; Sami KILZIE ; Andrea DELL'ACQUA ; Giovanna SCARFONE ; Paolo VERCELLINI ; Marco PETRILLO ; Salvatore DESSOLE ; Giampiero CAPOBIANCO ; Andrea CIAVATTINI ; Giovanni Delli CARPINI
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 2022;33(1):e10-
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.