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.

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.

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.

Background/Aims: Mirikizumab is a p19-directed anti-interleukin-23 antibody with potential efficacy against ulcerative colitis (UC). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of mirikizumab in a Japanese subpopulation with moderately to severely active UC from the LUCENT-1 and LUCENT-2 studies. Methods: LUCENT-1 and LUCENT-2 were phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of mirikizumab therapy in adults with moderately to severely active UC. LUCENT-1 was a 12-week induction trial where patients were randomized 3:1 to receive intravenous mirikizumab 300 mg or placebo every 4 weeks (Q4W). Patients achieving a clinical response with mirikizumab following the induction study were re-randomized 2:1 to double-blind treatment with either mirikizumab 200 mg or placebo subcutaneously Q4W during the 40-week maintenance study. The primary outcomes were clinical remission at week 12 of LUCENT-1 and week 40 of LUCENT-2. Results: A total of 137 patients enrolled in Japan were randomized to mirikizumab (n = 102) or placebo (n = 35). Compared with placebo, patients who received mirikizumab showed numerically higher clinical remission at week 12 of induction (32.4% [n = 33] vs. 2.9% [n = 1]) and at week 40 of maintenance (48.9% [n = 23] vs. 28.0% [n = 7]). A greater number of patients achieved key secondary endpoints in the mirikizumab group compared with placebo. The frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar across mirikizumab and placebo groups. Efficacy and safety results observed in the Japanese subpopulation were generally consistent with those in the overall population. Conclusions Mirikizumab induction and maintenance treatments were effective in Japanese patients with moderately to severely active UC. No new safety concerns were identified.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.