Objective: The optimal treatment of clinically early-stage cervical cancer with suspicious lymph nodes on pretreatment imaging is unclear. Therefore, we aimed to compare surgery (i.e., radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy±adjuvant therapy) with primary chemoradiotherapy as treatment strategies in this patient group regarding recurrence-free, overall survival and toxicity. Methods: Women diagnosed between 2009–2017 with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (2009) stage IA–IIA and suspicious nodes based on radiologic assessment of pretreatment imaging were retrospectively selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Cox proportional hazard was used to estimate survival and logistic regression for toxicity. Inverse probability weighting was used to correct for confounding.Grade ≥2 surgery-related (≤30 days) and grade ≥3 chemotherapy or radiotherapy-related (≤6 months) toxicity were collected. Missing data were imputed. Results: Of 330 patients included, 131 (40%) received surgery (followed by adjuvant therapy in 54%) and 199 (60%) chemoradiotherapy. Pathological nodal status was known in 100% of the surgery group and 32% (n=63) of the chemoradiotherapy group, of whom 43% (56/131) and 89% (56/63), respectively, had metastases. After adjustment for confounders, the recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR]=0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.34–1.31) and overall survival (HR=0.75; 95% CI=0.38–1.47) were not significantly different between both groups, while surgery was associated with more toxicity (odds ratio=2.82; 95% CI=1.42– 5.60), mainly surgery-related. Conclusion In patients with clinically early-stage cervical cancer and suspicious nodes on imaging, surgery and primary chemoradiotherapy yielded comparable results in terms of survival, whereas surgery might be associated with more (surgery-related) short-term toxicity.

Objective: In the 2018 FIGO staging system, cervical cancers with ≤5 mm depth of invasion (DOI) and a diameter of >7 mm, first classified as stage IB, are classified as stage IA. In this group, it is unclear what the risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) is. This retrospective cohort study aims to determine the incidence of LNM and to study the association between disease-related characteristics and LNM. Methods: Women diagnosed with FIGO 2009 IB cervical cancer, with ≤5 mm DOI and a diameter >7 mm, treated with a radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy between 1985 and 2020 were selected from the databases of the Amsterdam University Medical Center and the University Medical Center Groningen. The specimens of patients with LNM were revised by expert pathologists. The incidence of LNM was calculated. The associations between LNM and DOI, diameter, histological type, clinical visibility and lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) were evaluated by calculating odds ratios using logistic regression. Results: Of the 389 patients included, 10 had pathologically confirmed LNM (2.6%, 95% confidence interval=1.3%–4.5%). In case of LVSI, univariate analysis showed an increased risk of LNM (p=0.003 and p=0.012, respectively). No difference in LNM was found between lesions diagnosed by microscopy and clinically visible lesions. No LNM were found in patients without LVSI and a DOI of ≤3 mm. Conclusion For patients with stage IA cervical cancer with a diameter >7 mm, we recommend considering a pelvic lymph node assessment in case of DOI >3 mm and/or presence of LVSI.

Today, the patient who is diagnosed with early cervical cancer is offered a variety of treatments apart from standard therapy. Patients can be treated with a less radical hysterectomy (RH) regarding parametrectomy, a trachelectomy either vaginal or abdominal, and this can be performed through a minimal invasive or open procedure. All this in combination with nerve sparing and/or sentinel node technique. Level 1 evidence for the oncological safety of all these modifications is only available from 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two RCTs on more or less radical parametrectomy both showed that oncological safety was not compromised by doing less radical surgery. Because of the heterogeneity of the patient population and the high frequency of adjuvant radiotherapy, the true impact of surgical radicality cannot be assessed. Regarding the issue of oncological safety of fertility sparing treatments, case-control and retrospective case series suggest that trachelectomy is safe as long as the tumor diameter does not exceed 2 cm. Recently, both a RCT and 2 case-control studies showed a survival benefit for open surgery compared to minimally invasive surgery, whereas many previous case-control and retrospective case series on this subject did not show impaired oncological safety. In a case-control study the survival benefit for open surgery was restricted to the group of patients with a tumor diameter more than 2 cm. Although modifications of the traditional open RH seem safe for tumors with a diameter less than 2 cm, ongoing prospective RCTs and observational studies should give the final answer.
Case-Control Studies ; Fertility ; Humans ; Hysterectomy ; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures ; Population Characteristics ; Prospective Studies ; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant ; Retrospective Studies ; Trachelectomy ; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms*