Objective: This study aimed to determine whether the number of resected pelvic lymph nodes (PLNs) affects the prognosis of endometrial cancer (EC) patients at post-operative risk of recurrence. Methods: JGOG2043 was a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy of three chemotherapeutic regimens as adjuvant therapy in EC patients with post-operative recurrent risk. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 250 patients who underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy alone in JGOG2043. The number of resected and positive nodes and other clinicopathologic risk factors for survival were retrieved. Results: There were 83 patients in the group with less than 20 PLNs removed (group A), while 167 patients had 20 or more PLNs removed (group B). There was no significant difference in patients’ backgrounds between the two groups, and the rate of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different. There was a trend toward fewer pelvic recurrences in group B compared with group A (3.5% vs. 9.6%; p=0.050). Although Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no statistically significant difference in survival rates between the two groups (5-year overall survival [OS]=90.3% vs. 84.3%; p=0.199), multivariate analysis revealed that resection of 20 or more nodes is one of the independent prognostic factors (hazard ratio=0.49; 95% confidence interval=0.24–0.99; p=0.048), as well as surgical stage, high-risk histology, and advanced age for OS. Conclusion Resection of 20 or more PLNs was associated with improved pelvic control and better survival outcomes in EC patients at risk of recurrence who underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy alone and were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy.

Objective: This study aimed to determine whether the number of resected pelvic lymph nodes (PLNs) affects the prognosis of endometrial cancer (EC) patients at post-operative risk of recurrence. Methods: JGOG2043 was a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy of three chemotherapeutic regimens as adjuvant therapy in EC patients with post-operative recurrent risk. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 250 patients who underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy alone in JGOG2043. The number of resected and positive nodes and other clinicopathologic risk factors for survival were retrieved. Results: There were 83 patients in the group with less than 20 PLNs removed (group A), while 167 patients had 20 or more PLNs removed (group B). There was no significant difference in patients’ backgrounds between the two groups, and the rate of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different. There was a trend toward fewer pelvic recurrences in group B compared with group A (3.5% vs. 9.6%; p=0.050). Although Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no statistically significant difference in survival rates between the two groups (5-year overall survival [OS]=90.3% vs. 84.3%; p=0.199), multivariate analysis revealed that resection of 20 or more nodes is one of the independent prognostic factors (hazard ratio=0.49; 95% confidence interval=0.24–0.99; p=0.048), as well as surgical stage, high-risk histology, and advanced age for OS. Conclusion Resection of 20 or more PLNs was associated with improved pelvic control and better survival outcomes in EC patients at risk of recurrence who underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy alone and were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy.

Objective: This study aimed to determine whether the number of resected pelvic lymph nodes (PLNs) affects the prognosis of endometrial cancer (EC) patients at post-operative risk of recurrence. Methods: JGOG2043 was a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy of three chemotherapeutic regimens as adjuvant therapy in EC patients with post-operative recurrent risk. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 250 patients who underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy alone in JGOG2043. The number of resected and positive nodes and other clinicopathologic risk factors for survival were retrieved. Results: There were 83 patients in the group with less than 20 PLNs removed (group A), while 167 patients had 20 or more PLNs removed (group B). There was no significant difference in patients’ backgrounds between the two groups, and the rate of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different. There was a trend toward fewer pelvic recurrences in group B compared with group A (3.5% vs. 9.6%; p=0.050). Although Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no statistically significant difference in survival rates between the two groups (5-year overall survival [OS]=90.3% vs. 84.3%; p=0.199), multivariate analysis revealed that resection of 20 or more nodes is one of the independent prognostic factors (hazard ratio=0.49; 95% confidence interval=0.24–0.99; p=0.048), as well as surgical stage, high-risk histology, and advanced age for OS. Conclusion Resection of 20 or more PLNs was associated with improved pelvic control and better survival outcomes in EC patients at risk of recurrence who underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy alone and were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy.

Objective: Hospital treatment volume affects survival in patients with endometrial cancer;notably, initial treatment at high-volume centers improves survival outcomes. Our study assessed the effect of hospital treatment volume on cost-effectiveness and survival outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer in Japan. Methods: A decision-analytic model was evaluated using the following variables and their impact on cost-effectiveness: 1) hospital treatment volume (low-, intermediate-, and highvolume centers) and 2) postoperative recurrent risk factors based on pathological findings (high- and intermediate-risk or low-risk). Data were obtained from the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology database, systematic literature searches, and the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used as a measure of effectiveness. The model was built from a public healthcare perspective and the impact of uncertainty was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Results: A base-case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at high-volume centers was below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥5,000,000with a maximum of ¥3,777,830/4.28 QALY for the high- and intermediate-risk group, and ¥2,316,695/4.57 QALY for the low-risk group. Treatment at the high-volume centers showed better efficiency and cost-effectiveness in both strategies compared to intermediate- or lowvolume centers. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model outcome was robust to changes in input values. With the WTP threshold, treatment at high-volume centers remained cost-effective in at least 73.6% and 78.2% of iterations for high- and intermediate-risk, and lowrisk groups, respectively. Conclusion Treatment at high-volume centers is the most cost-effective strategy for guiding treatment centralization in patients with endometrial cancer.

Objective: Hospital treatment volume affects survival in patients with endometrial cancer;notably, initial treatment at high-volume centers improves survival outcomes. Our study assessed the effect of hospital treatment volume on cost-effectiveness and survival outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer in Japan. Methods: A decision-analytic model was evaluated using the following variables and their impact on cost-effectiveness: 1) hospital treatment volume (low-, intermediate-, and highvolume centers) and 2) postoperative recurrent risk factors based on pathological findings (high- and intermediate-risk or low-risk). Data were obtained from the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology database, systematic literature searches, and the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used as a measure of effectiveness. The model was built from a public healthcare perspective and the impact of uncertainty was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Results: A base-case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at high-volume centers was below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥5,000,000with a maximum of ¥3,777,830/4.28 QALY for the high- and intermediate-risk group, and ¥2,316,695/4.57 QALY for the low-risk group. Treatment at the high-volume centers showed better efficiency and cost-effectiveness in both strategies compared to intermediate- or lowvolume centers. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model outcome was robust to changes in input values. With the WTP threshold, treatment at high-volume centers remained cost-effective in at least 73.6% and 78.2% of iterations for high- and intermediate-risk, and lowrisk groups, respectively. Conclusion Treatment at high-volume centers is the most cost-effective strategy for guiding treatment centralization in patients with endometrial cancer.

Objective: Hospital treatment volume affects survival in patients with endometrial cancer;notably, initial treatment at high-volume centers improves survival outcomes. Our study assessed the effect of hospital treatment volume on cost-effectiveness and survival outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer in Japan. Methods: A decision-analytic model was evaluated using the following variables and their impact on cost-effectiveness: 1) hospital treatment volume (low-, intermediate-, and highvolume centers) and 2) postoperative recurrent risk factors based on pathological findings (high- and intermediate-risk or low-risk). Data were obtained from the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology database, systematic literature searches, and the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used as a measure of effectiveness. The model was built from a public healthcare perspective and the impact of uncertainty was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Results: A base-case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at high-volume centers was below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥5,000,000with a maximum of ¥3,777,830/4.28 QALY for the high- and intermediate-risk group, and ¥2,316,695/4.57 QALY for the low-risk group. Treatment at the high-volume centers showed better efficiency and cost-effectiveness in both strategies compared to intermediate- or lowvolume centers. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model outcome was robust to changes in input values. With the WTP threshold, treatment at high-volume centers remained cost-effective in at least 73.6% and 78.2% of iterations for high- and intermediate-risk, and lowrisk groups, respectively. Conclusion Treatment at high-volume centers is the most cost-effective strategy for guiding treatment centralization in patients with endometrial cancer.

Objective: Precursor lesions may be identified in fallopian tube tissue after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in patients with pathogenic variants of BRCA1/2. Serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC) is considered a precursor of high-grade serous carcinoma, whereas the significance of the p53 signature remains unclear. In this study, we investigated the relationship between the p53 signature and the risk of ovarian cancer. Methods: We analyzed the clinicopathological findings and conducted DNA sequencing for TP53 variants of p53 signatures and STIC lesions isolated using laser capture microdissection in 13 patients with pathogenic variants of BRCA1/2 who underwent RRSO and 17 control patients with the benign gynecologic disease. Results: TP53 pathogenic variants were detected significantly higher in RRSO group than control (p<0.001). No difference in the frequency of p53 signatures were observed between groups (53.8% vs 29.4%; p=0.17). TP53 sequencing and next-generation sequencing analysis in a patient with STIC and occult cancer revealed 2 TP53 mutations causing different p53 staining for STICs and another TP53 mutation shared between STIC and occult cancer. Conclusion The sequence analysis for TP53 revealed 2 types of p53 signatures, one with a risk of progression to STIC and ovarian cancer with pathological variants in TP53 and the other with a low risk of progression without pathological variants in TP53 as seen in control.

Objective: The aim of this study was to establish criteria that would indicate whether fertility preservation therapy would likely be safe for patients aged 40 years or less with endometrioid endometrial cancer based on their DNA methylation profile. Methods: Forty-nine fresh-frozen tissue samples from patients with endometrial cancer from an initial cohort and 31 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples from a second cohort were subjected to genome-wide DNA methylation analysis using the Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip. Results: Epigenomic clustering of early-onset endometrial cancer was correlated with the widely used recurrence risk classification. Genes showing differences in DNA methylation levels between the low-recurrence-risk category and intermediate- and high-risk categories were accumulated in pathways related to fibroblast growth factor and nuclear factor-κB signaling. DNA hypomethylation and overexpression of ZBTB38 were frequently observed in the low-risk category. Eight hundred thirty-one marker CpG probes showed area under the curve values of >0.7 on the receiver operating characteristic curve for discrimination of patients belonging to the low-risk category. By combining marker CpG sites, seven panels for placing patients into the low-risk category with 91.3% or more sensitivity and specificity in both the initial and second cohorts were established. Conclusions DNA methylation diagnostics criteria using up to 6 of 8 CpG sites for LPP, FOXO1, RNF4, EXOC6B, CCPG1, RREB1 and ZBTB38 may be applicable to recurrence risk estimation for patients aged 40 years or less with endometrial cancer, regardless of tumor cell content, even if formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded biopsy or curettage materials are used.

Objective: Associations between hospital treatment volume and survival outcomes for women with 3 types of gynecologic malignancies, and the trends and contributing factors for high-volume centers were examined. Methods: The Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology tumor registry databased retrospective study examined 206,845 women with 80,741, 73,647, and 52,457 of endometrial, cervical, and ovarian tumor, respectively, who underwent primary treatment in Japan between 2004 and 2015. Associations between the annual treatment volume and overall survival (OS) for each tumor type were examined using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model with restricted cubic splines. Institutions were categorized into 3 groups (low-, moderate-, and high-volume centers) based on hazard risks. Results: Hazard ratio (HR) for OS each the 3 tumors decreased with hospital treatment volume. The cut-off points of treatment volume were defined for high- (≥50, ≥51, and ≥27), moderate- (20–49, 20–50, and 17–26), and low-volume centers (≤19, ≤19, and ≤16) by cases/year for endometrial, cervical, and ovarian tumors, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed younger age, rare tumor histology, and initial surgical management as contributing factors for women at high-volume centers (all, p<0.001). The proportion of high-volume center treatments decreased, whereas low-volume center treatments increased (all p<0.001). Treatment at high-volume centers improved OS than that at other centers (adjusted HR [aHR]=0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.78–0.88; aHR=0.78, 95% CI=0.75–0.83; and aHR=0.90, 95% CI=0.86–0.95 for endometrial, cervical, and ovarian tumors). Conclusion Hospital treatment volume impacted survival outcomes. Treatments at high-volume centers conferred survival benefits for women with gynecologic malignancies. The proportion of treatments at high-volume centers have been decreasing recently.