The impact of waiting intervals on survival outcomes of patients with endometrial cancer: A systematic review of the literature

Disparities in Timeliness of Endometrial Cancer Care: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

We use the person-centered Pathway to Treatment framework to assess the scope of evidence on disparities in endometrial cancer stage at diagnosis. This report is intended to facilitate interventions, research, and advocacy that reduce disparities.

DATA SOURCES

We completed a structured search of electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Included studies were published between January 2000 and 2023 and addressed marginalized population(s) in the United States with the ability to develop endometrial cancer and addressed variable(s) outlined in the Pathway to Treatment.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Our database search strategy was designed for sensitivity to identify studies on disparate prolongation of the Pathway to Treatment for endometrial cancer, tallying 2,171. Inclusion criteria were broad, yet only 24 studies addressed this issue. All articles were independently screened by two reviewers.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Twenty-four studies were included: 10 on symptom appraisal, five on help seeking, five on diagnosis, and 10 on pretreatment intervals. Quality rankings were heterogeneous, between 3 and 9 (median 7.2) per the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We identified three qualitative, two participatory, and two intervention studies. Studies on help seeking predominantly investigate patient-driven delays. When disease factors were controlled for, delays of the pretreatment interval were independently associated with racism toward Black and Hispanic people, less education, lower socioeconomic status, and nonprivate insurance.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence gaps on disparities in timeliness of endometrial cancer care reveal emphasis of patient-driven help-seeking delays, reliance on health care-derived databases, underutilization of participatory methods, and a paucity of intervention studies.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Given that PROSPERO was not accepting systematic scoping review protocols at the time this study began, this study protocol was shared a priori through Open Science Framework on January 13, 2021 (doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/V2ZXY), and through peer review publication on April 13, 2021 (doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01649-x).

The wait time to primary surgery in endometrial cancer - impact on survival and predictive factors: a population-based SweGCG study

BACKGROUND

Poor survival rates in different cancer types are sometimes blamed on diagnostic and treatment delays, and it has been suggested that such delays might be related to sociodemographic factors such as education and ethnicity. We examined associations of the wait time from diagnosis to surgery and survival in endometrial cancer (EC) and explored patient and tumour factors influencing the wait time.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this historical population-based cohort study, The Swedish Quality Registry for Gynaecologic Cancer (SQRGC) was used to identify EC patients who underwent primary surgery between 2010 and 2018. Factors associated with a wait time > 32 d were analysed with logistic regression. The 32-d time point was defined in accordance with the Swedish Standardisation Cancer Care programme. Adjusted Poisson regression analyses were used to analyse excess mortality rate ratio (EMRR).

RESULTS

Out of 7366 women, 5535 waited > 32 d for surgery and 1098 > 70 d. The overall median wait time was 44 d. The factors most strongly associated with a wait time > 32 d were surgery at a university hospital (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.66) followed by country of birth (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.10-1.55) and year of diagnosis. There were no associations between wait time and histology or age. A wait time < 15 d was associated with higher mortality (adjusted EMRR 2.29,95% CI 1.36-3.84) whereas no negative survival impact was seen with a wait time of 70 d. Age, tumour stage, histology and risk group were highly associated with survival, whereas education, country of origin and hospital level did not have any impact on survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery within the first two weeks after EC diagnosis was associated with worsened survival. A prolonged wait time did not seem to have any significant adverse effect on prognosis.HighlightsSurgery within the first two weeks after diagnosis of endometrial cancer (EC) was associated with poorer survival.A prolonged wait time to surgery did not worsen prognosis.Delay in time to surgery was associated with sociodemographic factors.

British Gynaecological Cancer Society recommendations for women with gynecological cancer who received non-standard care during the COVID-19 pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, pressures on clinical services required adaptation to how care was prioritised and delivered for women with gynecological cancer. This document discusses potential 'salvage' measures when treatment has deviated from the usual standard of care. The British Gynaecological Cancer Society convened a multidisciplinary working group to develop recommendations for the onward management and follow-up of women with gynecological cancer who have been impacted by a change in treatment during the pandemic. These recommendations are presented for each tumor type and for healthcare systems, and the impact on gynecological services are discussed. It will be important that patient concerns about the impact of COVID-19 on their cancer pathway are acknowledged and addressed for their ongoing care.

Disparities and interventions in the timeliness of endometrial cancer diagnosis and treatment in the United States: a scoping review protocol

BACKGROUND

Disparities in the stage at diagnosis of endometrial cancer (EC) account for a significant proportion of the disparities in morbidity and mortality experienced by vulnerable groups in the USA. Evidence suggests that disparities in timeliness of care and treatment play a significant role in stage at diagnosis. Despite an increase in literature on EC disparities, the issue remains largely unchanged. The objectives of this review will be to synthesize the evidence to identify important remaining research questions and inform future interventions to reduce the disparity in stage at diagnosis of EC in the USA.

METHODS

This scoping review protocol will use the five-step framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley. A literature search will be conducted from January 2000 onwards in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Studies on delays in care of EC will be included if they were published in English and reported findings for the US population. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. The study methodological quality and bias will be appraised using appropriate tools. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. The literature search, data extraction, and evidence synthesis will be informed by the Pathway to Treatment Model, which divides time to cancer care initiation into appraisal, help-seeking, diagnostic, and pre-treatment intervals. Results will be reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement.

DISCUSSION

EC disparities research is currently benefitting form a growing expectation that studies have a real impact on disparities. Patient, healthcare, and disease factors impact the amount of time patients spend in different intervals of the Pathway to Treatment Model, so research and interventions aimed at reducing disparities in EC survival should be designed with cognizance to how these factors impact their target population. Reviews on disparities in stage at diagnosis of EC exist but do not provide a comprehensive picture of the pathway to treatment. This review will seek to provide an expanded bedrock of evidence for future studies to build on as they aim to more actively reduce EC disparities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework ( osf.io/v2zxy ).

Risk Reclassification of Patients with Endometrial Cancer Based on Tumor Molecular Profiling: First Real World Data

Recently, guidelines for endometrial cancer (EC) were released that guide treatment decisions according to the tumors’ molecular profiles. To date, no real-world data regarding the clinical feasibility of molecular profiling have been released. This retrospective, monocentric study investigated the clinical feasibility of molecular profiling and its potential impact on treatment decisions. Tumor specimens underwent molecular profiling (testing for genetic alterations, (immune-)histological examination of lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), and L1CAM) as part of the clinical routine and were classified according to the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) classification system and to an integrated molecular risk stratification. Shifts between risk groups and potential treatment alterations are described. A total of 60 cases were included, of which twelve were excluded (20%), and eight of the remaining 48 were not characterized (drop-out rate of 16.7%). Molecular profiling revealed 4, 6, 25, and 5 patients with DNA polymerase-epsilon mutation, microsatellite instability, no specific molecular profile, and TP53 mutation, respectively. Three patients had substantial LVSI, and four patients showed high L1CAM expression. Molecular profiling took a median of 18.5 days. Substantial shifts occurred between the classification systems: four patients were upstaged, and 19 patients were downstaged. Molecular profiling of EC specimens is feasible in a daily routine, and new risk classification systems will change treatment decisions substantially.

Covid-19: What is the best approach in gynecological oncology patient management during the coronavirus pandemic?

Coronavirus (COVID-19) infection is a new major concern and a global emergency in almost all countries worldwide; due to the higher sensibility of cancer patients, they are more susceptible to severe and fatal infections, being nearly 10 times more likely than in healthy individuals infected with this virus. Although the aggressive nature of a cancer is a matter of concern, our exact role as oncologists in this time of restricted resources is not fully clarified. Regarding some consensus recommendation for postponing surgery, there is still an essential need for a single approved protocol regarding each type of malignancy. Iran, as one of the first involved countries in this crisis in Asia, which also has a high prevalence of gynecological malignancies, will certainly require an individualized decision-making schedule based on the most accepted global consensus opinion. Considering our restricted health system resources, herein we tried to introduce a logical gynecologic cancer management protocol based on the stage and survival expectancy of each tumor, along with reviewing all recent recommendations. The limited statistics published in this short period of time have obliged us to mainly focus on expert opinions, and the individualized clinical judgments should be agreed upon by multidisciplinary tumor board consensus. In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic overshadows all aspects of medicine, and decision making in gynecological oncology patients requires precise and appropriate judgment based on the available local resources.

Perioperative blood transfusion and ovarian cancer survival rates: A meta-analysis based on univariate, multivariate and propensity score matched data

The negative impact of perioperative blood transfusion on survival outcomes has been reported in several cancer types. The purpose of the present study is to summarize existing evidence in ovarian cancer patients. We searched the Medline, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL and Google Scholar databases for observational and randomized trials that assessed the impact of perioperative blood transfusion on the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of ovarian cancer patients that undergone debulking surgery were selected for inclusion. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Statistical meta-analysis was performed with the RevMan 5.3 software using the Der-Simonian Laird random effects model. Seven studies were identified which included 2341 ovarian cancer patients. Meta-analyses that were based on univariate and multivariate reporting revealed that perioperative blood transfusion had a significant negative impact on the patient`s OS rates (OR 1.78, 95 %CI 1.16, 2.74 and OR 1.31, 95 %CI 1.00, 1.71 respectively). Disease free survival rates were also influenced according to the results of the univariate analysis (OR 1.58, 95 %CI 1.14, 2.19), however, the effect was not significant in the multivariate analysis. The analysis that was based on propensity score matched populations did not reveal differences among transfused and non-transfused. Concluding, the findings of our meta-analysis suggest that transfusion of blood products during the perioperative period is not an independent factor that may affect survival outcomes of ovarian cancer patients. Nevertheless, it should be noted that patients that receive transfusion have several potential confounders that may affect their survival outcomes.

COVID-19 Pandemic and Surgical Oncology: Preserving the Academic Mission

BACKGROUND

The global pandemic of respiratory disease cause by the novel human coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has caused untold suffering, loss of life and upheaval in society. The pandemic has lead to massive redirection of health care resources to treat the surge of COVID-19 patients, and enforcement of social distancing to reduce the rate of transmission.

METHODS

Editorial Board members provided observations of the implications of the pandemic on academic surgical oncology.

RESULTS

Delivery of health care to other populations including cancer patients has been significantly disrupted. The implications both short term and long term threaten preservation of the academic mission in medicine at large, and certainly in the field of surgical oncology.

CONCLUSIONS

The effects on surgical oncology training, research and clinical trials are major.

Impact of time to radiation therapy in adjuvant settings in endometrial carcinoma: A multicentric retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Time to adjuvant treatment could have an impact on cancer prognosis. It is possible that robotic surgery lengthens the healing time of vaginal cuff after minimally invasive hysterectomy. The objective of this study was to state the impact of time to RT (TTR) on prognosis in endometrial carcinoma (EC) patients and to assess variables associated with TTR.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a multicentric retrospective study in two cancer centers. We included EC patients, between January 1996 and January 2016. We searched variables associated with TTR and impact of TTR on end-points: local recurrence-free survival, metastatic-free survival, event-free survival and overall survival.

RESULTS

329 patients were included and 279 were analyzed for TTR impact. Robotic surgery was associated with shorter TTR (8 weeks, 8.9 w for laparotomy, 9.2 w for laparoscopy). Pelvic lymphadenectomy, para-aortic lymphadenectomy, discussion in multidisciplinary meeting and treatment center was independently associated with TTR. No impact of TTR was shown on metastatic-free survival, event-free survival and overall survival but there was a trend of a decreased local recurrence rate in case of prolonged TTR (HR_{continuous variable} = 1.08; CI95 %: 0.97-1.2).

CONCLUSION

Our study did not show any impact of treatment delay on survival end-points although prolonged TTR could moderate the benefit of radiotherapy on local control rate. Surgical route was not associated with TTR, particularly robot-associated laparoscopy did not lengthen treatment delay. TTR seems dependent of health-care organization and could represent a quality criterion of EC care for institutions.