The Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (JSGO) Guidelines 2022 for the Treatment of Uterine Cervical Cancer are revised from the 2017 guideline. This guideline aimed to provide standard care for cervical cancer, indicate appropriate current treatment methods for cervical cancer, minimize variances in treatment methods among institutions, improve disease prognosis and treatment safety, reduce the economic and psychosomatic burden of patients by promoting the performance of appropriate treatment, and enhance mutual understanding between patients and healthcare professionals. The guidelines were prepared through the consensus of the JSGO Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of evidence gathered through the literature searches and the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice situations in Japan. The guidelines comprise seven chapters and 5 algorithms.The main features of the 2022 revision are as follows: 1) added discussed points at the final consensus meeting; 2) revised the treatment methods based on the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2018 staging system; 3) examined minimally invasive surgery based on Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial; 4) added clinical question (CQ) for treatments of rare histological types, gastric type, and small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; 5) added CQ for intensity-modulated radiation therapy; 6) added CQ for cancer genomic profiling test; and 7) added CQ for cancer survivorship. Each recommendation is accompanied by a classification of recommendation categories based on the consensus reached by the Guideline Committee members. Here, we present the English version of the JSGO Guidelines 2022 for the Treatment of Uterine Cervical 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.

The Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (JSGO) Guidelines 2022 for the Treatment of Uterine Cervical Cancer are revised from the 2017 guideline. This guideline aimed to provide standard care for cervical cancer, indicate appropriate current treatment methods for cervical cancer, minimize variances in treatment methods among institutions, improve disease prognosis and treatment safety, reduce the economic and psychosomatic burden of patients by promoting the performance of appropriate treatment, and enhance mutual understanding between patients and healthcare professionals. The guidelines were prepared through the consensus of the JSGO Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of evidence gathered through the literature searches and the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice situations in Japan. The guidelines comprise seven chapters and 5 algorithms.The main features of the 2022 revision are as follows: 1) added discussed points at the final consensus meeting; 2) revised the treatment methods based on the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2018 staging system; 3) examined minimally invasive surgery based on Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial; 4) added clinical question (CQ) for treatments of rare histological types, gastric type, and small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; 5) added CQ for intensity-modulated radiation therapy; 6) added CQ for cancer genomic profiling test; and 7) added CQ for cancer survivorship. Each recommendation is accompanied by a classification of recommendation categories based on the consensus reached by the Guideline Committee members. Here, we present the English version of the JSGO Guidelines 2022 for the Treatment of Uterine Cervical 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.

The Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (JSGO) Guidelines 2022 for the Treatment of Uterine Cervical Cancer are revised from the 2017 guideline. This guideline aimed to provide standard care for cervical cancer, indicate appropriate current treatment methods for cervical cancer, minimize variances in treatment methods among institutions, improve disease prognosis and treatment safety, reduce the economic and psychosomatic burden of patients by promoting the performance of appropriate treatment, and enhance mutual understanding between patients and healthcare professionals. The guidelines were prepared through the consensus of the JSGO Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of evidence gathered through the literature searches and the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice situations in Japan. The guidelines comprise seven chapters and 5 algorithms.The main features of the 2022 revision are as follows: 1) added discussed points at the final consensus meeting; 2) revised the treatment methods based on the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2018 staging system; 3) examined minimally invasive surgery based on Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial; 4) added clinical question (CQ) for treatments of rare histological types, gastric type, and small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; 5) added CQ for intensity-modulated radiation therapy; 6) added CQ for cancer genomic profiling test; and 7) added CQ for cancer survivorship. Each recommendation is accompanied by a classification of recommendation categories based on the consensus reached by the Guideline Committee members. Here, we present the English version of the JSGO Guidelines 2022 for the Treatment of Uterine Cervical 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: As coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rages on, it is a challenging task to balance resources for treatment of COVID-19 and malignancy-based treatment. For the development of optimal strategies, assessing the conditions and constrains in treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic is pertinent. This study reported about a nationwide survey conducted by the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Methods: We interviewed 265 designated training facilities about the state of their clinical practice from the time period between March and December 2020. We asked the facility doctors in charge to fill a web-based questionnaire. Results: A total of 232 facilities (87.5%) responded. A decrease in the number of outpatient visits was reported, and the major reason attributed was reluctance of patients to visit hospitals rather than facility restrictions. The actual number of surgeries decreased by 3.9%, compared to 2019. There was a significant difference when the variable of “Prefectures operating under special safety precautions” or not was introduced. There was no increase in the rate of advanced stages in the three cancer types studied. However, 34.1% participants perceived COVID-19 affected management and prognosis. Conclusion Refraining from visiting hospitals based on the patient's judgment may be expected to be an issue in the future. No significant decrease in surgeries was observed, and it would seem that there were few forced changes in treatment plans, but “the State of Emergency” had an impact. There was no increase in the rate of advanced cancers, but this will need to be monitored.

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.

Objective: The practices pertaining to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) in Japan have been rapidly changing owing to the clinical development of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, the increasing availability of companion diagnostics, and the broadened insurance coverage of HBOC management from April 2020. A questionnaire of gynecologic oncologists was conducted to understand the current status and to promote the widespread standardization of future HBOC management. Methods: A Google Form questionnaire was administered to the members of the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology. The survey consisted of 25 questions in 4 categories: respondent demographics, HBOC management experience, insurance coverage of HBOC management, and educational opportunities related to HBOC. Results: A total of 666 valid responses were received. Regarding the prevalence of HBOC practice, the majority of physicians responded in the negative and required human resources, information sharing and educational opportunities, and expanded insurance coverage to adopt and improve HBOC practice. Most physicians were not satisfied with the educational opportunities provided so far, and further expansion was desired. They remarked on the psychological burdens of many HBOC managements. Physicians reported these burdens could be alleviated by securing sufficient time to engage in HBOC management, creating easy-to-understand explanatory material for patients, collaboration with specialists in genetic medicine, and educational opportunities. Conclusion Gynecologic oncologists in Japan are struggling to deal with psychological burdens in HBOC practice. To promote the clinical practice of HBOC management, there is an urgent need to strengthen human resources and improve educational opportunities, and expand insurance coverage for HBOC management.

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.