Objective: The study compared the treatment outcomes of surgery versus radiotherapy, including concurrent chemoradiotherapy, in stage Ib2–IIb cervical adenocarcinoma patients in Japan. Methods: Of 57,470 patients diagnosed with stage I–IV cervical cancer from January 2001–December 2011, 1,932 patients with stage Ib2–IIb cervical adenocarcinoma were initially treated by surgery or radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS) in all and 614 propensity score-matched (PSM) patients (307 per group). We compared OS and prognosis factors based on age, primary stage, and treatment arm. Results: In Japan, >80% (n=1,573) of stage Ib2–IIb cervical adenocarcinoma patients underwent surgery. The 5-year OS of surgery vs. radiotherapy groups were 82.1% (n=704) vs. 79.7% (n=59) (hazard ratio [HR]=1.494; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.826–2.702; p=0.181) for stage Ib2, 76.6% (n=239) vs. 66.7% (n=54) (HR=1.679; 95% CI=0.986–2.858; p=0.053) for stage IIa, and 71.1% (n=630) vs. 58.9% (n=246) (HR=1.711; 95% CI=1.341–2.184; p<0.001) for stage IIb. In 614 PSM patients balanced for age and carcinoma stage Ib2–IIb, the 5-year OS of surgery vs. radiation groups was 73.0% (n=307) vs. 65.5% (n=307) (HR=1.394; 95% CI=1.044–1.860; p=0.023). In multivariable analysis, age (HR=1.293; 95% CI=1.045–1.601; p=0.018), treatment arm, radiotherapy (HR=1.556; 95% CI=1.253–1.933; p<0.001), and stage IIb (HR=1.783; 95% CI=1.443–2.203; p=0.018) were independent prognosis factors for 5-year OS in stage Ib2–IIb adenocarcinoma patients. Conclusion Age (>65 years), treatment arm (radiotherapy), and stage IIb significantly affect OS in cervical adenocarcinoma patients. Surgery may be considered for <65-year-old patients with stage IIb adenocarcinoma.

Carcinosarcoma ; Choriocarcinoma ; Conflict of Interest ; Endometrial Neoplasms ; Female ; Gestational Trophoblastic Disease ; Humans ; Japan ; Pharmacists ; Pregnancy ; Sarcoma ; Trophoblasts

Objective: The standard dose for pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) is 50 mg/m2 every 4 weeks. While 40 mg/m2 has recently been used in clinical practice, evidence supporting this use remains lacking. Methods: This phase III randomized, non-inferiority study compared progressionfree survival (PFS) for patients with platinum-resistant ovarian carcinoma between an experimental arm (40 mg/m2 PLD) and a standard arm (50 mg/m2 PLD) until 10 courses, disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Eligible patients had received ≤2 prior lines.Stratification was by performance status and PFS of prior chemotherapy (<3 months versus ≥3 months). The primary endpoint was PFS and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), toxicity profile, clinical response and tolerability. The total number of patients was 470. Results: The trial was prematurely closed due to slow recruitment, with 272 patients randomized to the experimental arm (n=137) and standard arm (n=135). Final analysis was performed with 234 deaths and 269 events for PFS. In the experimental arm vs. standard arm, median PFS was 4.0 months vs. 4.0 months (hazard ratio [HR]=1.065; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.830–1.366) and median OS was 14.0 months vs. 14.0 months (HR=1.078; 95% CI=0.831–1.397). Hematologic toxicity and oral cavity mucositis (≥grade 2) were more frequent in the standard arm than in the experimental arm, but no difference was seen in ≥grade 2 hand-foot skin reaction. Conclusion Non-inferiority of 2 PLD dosing schedule was not confirmed because the trial was closed prematurely. However, recommendation of dose reduction of PLD should be based both on efficacy and safety.

The fifth edition of the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines for the treatment of ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer was published in 2020. The guidelines contain 6 chapters—namely, (1) overview of the guidelines; (2) epithelial ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer; (3) recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer; (4) borderline epithelial tumors of the ovary; (5) malignant germ cell tumors of the ovary; and (6) malignant sex cord-stromal tumors. Furthermore, the guidelines comprise 5 algorithms—namely, (1) initial treatment for ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer; (2) treatment for recurrent ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer; (3) initial treatment for borderline epithelial ovarian tumor; (4) treatment for malignant germ cell tumor; and (5) treatment for sex cord-stromal tumor. Major changes in the new edition include the following: (1) revision of the title to “guidelines for the treatment of ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer”; (2) involvement of patients and general (male/female) participants in addition to physicians, pharmacists, and nurses; (3) clinical questions (CQs) in the PICO format; (4) change in the expression of grades of recommendation and level of evidence in accordance with the GRADE system; (5) introduction of the idea of a body of evidence; (6) categorization of references according to research design; (7) performance of systematic reviews and meta-analysis for three CQs; and (8) voting for each CQ/recommendation and description of the consensus.

Objective: Regional lymph node (LN) dissection is a standard surgical procedure for endometrial cancer, but there is currently no clear consensus on its therapeutic significance. We aimed to determine the impact of regional LN dissection on the outcome of endometrial cancer. Methods: Study subjects comprised 36,813 patients who were registered in the gynecological tumor registry of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology, had undergone initial surgery for endometrial cancer between 2004 and 2011, and whose clinicopathological factors and prognosis were appropriate for our investigation. The following clinicopathological factors were obtained from the registry: age, surgical stage classification, Union for International Cancer Control tumor, node, metastasis classification, histological type, histological differentiation, presence or absence of LN dissection, and postoperative treatment. We retrospectively analyzed the clinicopathological factors and therapeutic outcomes for patients with endometrial cancer. Results: Analysis of all subjects showed that the group that underwent LN dissection had a significantly better overall survival than the group that did not undergo dissection. Analysis based on stage showed similar results across groups, except for stage Ia. Analysis based on stage and histological type showed similar results across groups, except for stage Ia endometrial carcinoma G1 or Ia G2. Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors indicated that LN dissection is an independent prognostic factor and that it has a greater impact on prognosis than adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusion Despite the limitations of a retrospective study with some biases, the results suggest that LN dissection in endometrial cancer has a prognostic effect.

Objective: To assess the efficacy of the FIGO 2018 classification system for nodal-specific classifications for early-stage cervical cancer; specifically, to examine the impact of nodal metastasis on survival and the effect of postoperative treatments, according to histological subtypes. Methods: This society-based retrospective observational study in Japan examined 16,539 women with the 2009 FIGO stage IB1 cervical cancer who underwent primary surgical treatment from 2004 to 2015. Associations of cause-specific survival (CSS) with nodal metastasis and postoperative adjuvant therapy were examined according to histology type (squamous cell carcinoma [SCC], n=10,315; and non-SCC, n=6,224). Results: The nodal metastasis rate for SCC was higher than that for non-SCC (10.7% vs. 8.3%, p<0.001). In multivariable analysis, the impact of nodal metastasis on CSS was greater for non-SCC tumors (adjusted-hazard ratio [HR], 3.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.40–4.02) than for SCC tumors (adjusted-HR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.70–2.84; p<0.001). Propensity score matching analysis showed significantly lower CSS rates for women with pelvic nodal metastasis from non-SCC tumors than from SCC tumors (5-year CSS rate, 75.4% vs. 90.3%, p<0.001). The CSS rates for women with nodal metastasis in SCC histology were similar between the postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy and chemotherapy groups (89.2% vs. 86.1%, p=0.42), whereas those in non-SCC histology who received postoperative chemotherapy improved the CSS (74.1% vs. 67.7%, p=0.043). Conclusion The node-specific staging system in the 2018 FIGO cervical cancer classification is applicable to both non-SCC tumors and SCC tumors; however, the prognostic significance of nodal metastases and efficacy of postoperative therapies vary according to histology.

Objective: The aim of this study was to review the clinicopathological characteristics of small cell neuroendocrine cervical cancer (SCNEC) and to identify the optimal treatment. Methods: The Japanese Society of Gynecologic Oncology conducted a retrospective cohort study of SCNECs enrolled in the Gynecological Tumor Registry of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology between 2004 and 2015. All cases were modified and unified by International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2008 (Union for International Cancer Control 7th edition). Results: There were 822 registered patients diagnosed with SCNEC from 2004 to 2015 which comprised 1.1% (822/73,698) of all uterine cervical cancer cases. Rates of lymph-node and distant metastasis were significantly higher in T1b2 (38.9% and 13.7%, respectively) than T1b1 (14.2% and 4.4%, respectively) (p<0.01). In IB2 and T1bN1M0 SCNEC, the 5-year survival rate with surgery followed by chemotherapy was significantly higher than that with surgery followed by radiation therapy/concurrent chemoradiation therapy (p<0.01). Conclusion SNCEC tumors >4 cm in size had greater rates of lymph-node and distant metastasis when compared with tumors ≤4 cm. Adjuvant chemotherapy, rather than radiotherapy, may improve prognosis after surgery in T1bN1M0 SCNEC.

Objective: To examine the effectiveness of progestin re-treatment for recurrent endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN), atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AH) and endometrial cancer (EC) following initial fertility-sparing treatment. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by an Expert Panel of the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology Endometrial Cancer Committee. Multiple search engines, including PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database, were searched in December 2021 using the keywords “Endometrial neoplasms,” “Endometrial hyperplasia,” “Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia,” “Fertility preservation,” “Progestins,” AND “Recurrence.” Cases describing progestin re-treatment for recurrent EIN, AH and EC were compared with cases that underwent conventional hysterectomy. The primary outcomes were survival and disease recurrence, and the secondary outcome was pregnancy. Results: After screening 238 studies, 32 with results for recurrent treatment were identified. These studies included 365 patients (270 received progestin re-treatment and 95 underwent hysterectomy). Most progestin re-treatment involved medroxyprogesterone acetate or megestrol acetate (94.5%). Complete remission (CR) following progestin re-treatment was achieved in 219 (81.1%) cases, with 3-, 6- and 9-month cumulative CR rates of 22.8%, 51.7% and 82.6%, respectively. Progestin re-treatment was associated with higher risk of disease recurrence than conventional hysterectomy was (odds ratio [OR]=6.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.99–23.10), and one patient (0.4%) died of disease. Fifty-one (14.0%) women became pregnant after recurrence, and progestin re-treatment demonstrated a possibility of pregnancy (OR=2.48; 95% CI=0.94–6.58). Conclusion This meta-analysis suggests that repeat progestin therapy is an effective option for women with recurrent EIN, AH and EC, who wish to retain their fertility.

The Fourth Edition of the Guidelines for Treatment of Uterine Body Neoplasm was published in 2018. These guidelines include 9 chapters: 1. Overview of the guidelines, 2. Initial treatment for endometrial cancer, 3. Postoperative adjuvant therapy for endometrial cancer, 4. Post-treatment surveillance for endometrial cancer, 5. Treatment for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, 6. Fertility-sparing therapy, 7. Treatment of uterine carcinosarcoma and uterine sarcoma, 8. Treatment of trophoblastic disease, 9. Document collection; and nine algorithms: 1-3. Initial treatment of endometrial cancer, 4. Postoperative adjuvant treatment for endometrial cancer, 5. Treatment of recurrent endometrial cancer, 6. Fertility-sparing therapy, 7. Treatment for uterine carcinosarcoma, 8. Treatment for uterine sarcoma, 9. Treatment for choriocarcinoma. Each chapter includes overviews and clinical questions, and recommendations, objectives, explanation, and references are provided for each clinical question. This revision has no major changes compared to the 3rd edition, but does have some differences: 1) an explanation of the recommendation decision process and conflict of interest considerations have been added in the overview, 2) nurses, pharmacists and patients participated in creation of the guidelines, in addition to physicians, 3) the approach to evidence collection is listed at the end of the guidelines, and 4) for clinical questions that lack evidence or clinical validation, the opinion of the Guidelines Committee is given as a “Recommendations for tomorrow”.

Objective: In this study we sought to investigate the clinical factors that affect postprogression survival (PPS) in patients with recurrent or persistent clear cell carcinoma (CCC).We utilized the JGOG3017/Gynecological Cancer InterGroup data to compare paclitaxel plus carboplatin (TC) and irinotecan plus cisplatin (CPT-P) in the treatment of stages I to IV CCC. Methods: We enrolled 166 patients with recurrent or persistent CCC and assessed the impact of variables, including platinum sensitivity, treatment arm, crossover chemotherapy, primary stage, residual tumor at primary surgery, performance status, ethnicity, and tumor reduction surgery at recurrence on the median of PPS in patients with recurrent or persistent CCC. Results: A total of 77 patients received TC, and 89 patients received CPT-P. The median PPS for patients with platinum-resistant disease was 10.9 months, compared with 18.8 months for patients with platinum-sensitive disease (hazard ratio [HR]=1.88; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.30–2.72; log-rank p<0.001). In the multivariate analysis, the platinum sensitivity (resistant vs. sensitivity; HR=1.60; p=0.027) and primary stage (p=0.009) were identified as independent predictors of prognosis factors for PPS in recurrent or persistent CCC. Conclusions Our findings revealed that platinum sensitivity and primary stage are clinical factors that significantly affect PPS in patients with recurrent or persistent CCC as wellas other histologic subtypes of ovarian cancer. PPS in patients with recurrent CCC should establish the basis for future clinical trials in this population.