Fertility-sparing Surgery for Patients with Cervical, Endometrial, and Ovarian Cancers

Reproductive concerns and its correlation with fear of recurrence and level of family support in patients of childbearing age with gynecologic malignancies

BACKGROUND

To discuss the current status of reproductive concerns and its correlation with fear of recurrence and level of family support in patients of childbearing age with gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS

A convenient sampling method was used to enroll 188 patients with gynecologic malignancies in Nanjing Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University, and Haian Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine from September 2022 to April 2023. Patients were assessed using general information questionnaire, Reproductive Concerns After Cancer Scale (RCAC), Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI) questionnaire, and Perceived Social Support-Family (PSS-FA) Scale.

RESULTS

Among patients of childbearing age with gynecologic malignancies, the total RCAC score was (54.35 ± 7.52), indicating a moderate level of reproductive concerns. Patients scored (20.98 ± 4.51) on FCRI, implying a moderate level of fear of recurrence. The PSS-FA score was (9.57 ± 2.76), denoting a moderate level of family support. The total score and each dimensional score of RCAC were positively correlated with FCRI total score (P < 0.05), and negatively correlated with PSS-FA total score (P < 0.05). Fear of recurrence, family support level, number of children, educational background, treatment modality, and fertility intention were influencing factors for reproductive concerns in patients of childbearing age with gynecologic malignancies (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The reproductive concerns, fear of recurrence and family support are all at moderate levels in patients of childbearing age with gynecologic malignancies, and reproductive concerns are positively correlated with fear of recurrence and negatively correlated with family support.

Fertility-sparing options for cancer patients

Fertility preservation is becoming an integral part of cancer care among women of reproductive age. Despite advances in the treatment of pelvic malignancies, all the currently available treatment approaches, including radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and surgery, place women at high risk for future fertility impairment. With improved long-term survival rates associated with cancer, expanding the reproductive options available is of high priority. Several fertility preservation options are available today for women with gynecologic and non-gynecologic malignancies. Depending on the underlying oncological entity, these can include the following procedures whether alone or in combination: oocyte cryopreservation, embryo cryopreservation, ovarian tissue cryopreservation, ovarian transposition, and trachelectomy. The purpose of this review is to provide the most up-to-date information on the aforementioned fertility-preserving approaches and highlight the current challenges, drawbacks, and areas of research where more data are still very necessary to optimize outcomes in young female oncological patients desiring pregnancy in the future.

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE Guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma

Background: The standard surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma (EC) consisting of total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy drastically affects the quality of life of patients and creates a challenge for clinicians. Recent evidence-based guidelines of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in EC in a multidisciplinary setting. While also addressing work-up for fertility preservation treatments and the management and follow-up for fertility preservation, it was considered relevant to further extend the guidance on fertility sparing treatment. Objectives: To define recommendations for fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Materials and Methods: ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of EC (11 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2016, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 95 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. Results: The multidisciplinary development group formulated 48 recommendations for fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma in four sections: patient selection, tumour clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and special issues. Conclusions: These recommendations provide guidance to professionals caring for women with endometrial carcinoma, including but not limited to professionals in the field of gynaecological oncology, onco-fertility, reproductive surgery, endoscopy, conservative surgery, and histopathology, and will help towards a holistic and multidisciplinary approach for this challenging clinical scenario. What is new? A collaboration was set up between the ESGO, ESHRE and ESGE, aiming to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines focusing on key aspects of fertility-sparing treatment in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE Guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Hum Reprod Open 2023;2023:hoac057. [PMID: 36756380 PMCID: PMC9900425 DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoac057] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

STUDY QUESTION

How should fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma be performed?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Forty-eight recommendations were formulated on fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The standard surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma consisting of total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy drastically affects the quality of life of patients and creates a challenge for clinicians. Recent evidence-based guidelines of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in endometrial carcinoma in a multidisciplinary setting. While addressing also work-up for fertility preservation treatments and the management and follow-up for fertility preservation, it was considered relevant to further extend the guidance on fertility-sparing treatment.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

A collaboration was set up between the ESGO, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), aiming to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines focusing on key aspects of fertility-sparing treatment in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of endometrial carcinoma (11 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2016, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgement was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 95 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The multidisciplinary development group formulated 48 recommendations in four sections; patient selection, tumour clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and special issues.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

Of the 48 recommendations, none could be based on level I evidence and only 16 could be based on level II evidence, implicating that 66% of the recommendations are supported only by observational data, professional experience and consensus of the development group.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

These recommendations provide guidance to professionals caring for women with endometrial carcinoma, including but not limited to professionals in the field of gynaecological oncology, onco-fertility, reproductive surgery, endoscopy, conservative surgery and histopathology, and will help towards a holistic and multidisciplinary approach for this challenging clinical scenario.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

All costs relating to the development process were covered from ESGO, ESHRE and ESGE funds. There was no external funding of the development process or manuscript production. G.S. has reported grants from MSD Italia S.r.l., advisory boards for Storz, Bayer, Astrazeneca, Metronic, TESARO Bio Italy S.r.l and Johnson & Johnson, and honoraria for lectures from Clovis Oncology Italy S.r.l. M.G. has reported advisory boards for Gedeon Richter and Merck. The other authors have reported no conflicts of interest.

DISCLAIMER

This document represents the views of ESHRE, ESGO and ESGE which are the result of consensus between the relevant stakeholders and where relevant based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. The recommendations should be used for informational and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care, or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type.

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE Guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma

The standard surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma, consisting of total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, drastically affects the quality of life of patients and creates a challenge for clinicians. Recent evidence-based guidelines of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) provide comprehensive information on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in endometrial carcinoma in a multidisciplinary setting. While addressing also work-up for fertility preservation treatments and the management and follow-up for fertility preservation, it was considered relevant to further extend the guidance on fertility-sparing treatment.A collaboration was set up between the ESGO, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), aiming to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines focusing on key aspects of fertility-sparing treatment (patient selection, tumor clinicopathological characteristics, treatment, special issues) in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of endometrial carcinoma (11 experts from across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2016, identified by a systematic search, was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 95 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives.

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE Guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma

Background

The standard surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma (EC) consisting of total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy drastically affects the quality of life of patients and creates a challenge for clinicians. Recent evidence-based guidelines of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in EC in a multidisciplinary setting. While also addressing work-up for fertility preservation treatments and the management and follow-up for fertility preservation, it was considered relevant to further extend the guidance on fertility sparing treatment.

Objectives

To define recommendations for fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

Materials and Methods

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of EC (11 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2016, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 95 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives.

Results

The multidisciplinary development group formulated 48 recommendations for fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma in four sections: patient selection, tumour clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and special issues.

Conclusions

These recommendations provide guidance to professionals caring for women with endometrial carcinoma, including but not limited to professionals in the field of gynaecological oncology, onco-fertility, reproductive surgery, endoscopy, conservative surgery, and histopathology, and will help towards a holistic and multidisciplinary approach for this challenging clinical scenario. What is new? A collaboration was set up between the ESGO, ESHRE and ESGE, aiming to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines focusing on key aspects of fertility-sparing treatment in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.

Women With Ovarian Cancer and With Fertility Preservation: A Survival Analysis Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database and Construction of Nomograms to Predict Cancer-Specific Survival

Objective

This study aimed to determine the risk and prognostic factors of ovarian cancer (OC) in women having fertility-sparing surgery, as well as survival outcomes of those with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We also determined the effect of chemotherapy in OC treatment and used multiple independent risk factors to establish a prognostic nomogram model for patients with stage I EOC.

Patients and Methods

Individuals with OC and with fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) between 1998 and 2016 were identified in the SEER database. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the distributions of patient characteristics according to chemotherapy. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was assessed using Kaplan–Meier curves and log-rank tests. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression was conducted to determine the independent prognostic factors for CSS. Cox analysis was used to construct a nomogram model. The C-index and calibration plots showed the performance evaluation results.

Results

A total of 1,839 women with OC with FSS were identified in the SEER database. Factors associated with significantly higher odds of undergoing chemotherapy included younger age, being unmarried, having grades 2–4, stages II–III, or clear cell and non-epithelial histologic type following a multivariate logistic regression analysis. Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed that age, marital status, chemotherapy, histologic type, grade, and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage were independent prognostic factors for CSS. In stage I EOC, the prognosis in patients with stage IA/IB-grade 3 (5-year CSS 85.3%) or stage IC (5-year CSS 80.6%) was worse than that in those with stage IA/IB-grade 1 (5-year CSS 95.2%), or stage IA/IB-grade 2 (5-year CSS 94.7%). However, chemotherapy improved the survival of patients with stage IA/IB-grade 3 (5-year CSS 78.1% vs. 94.6%, p = 0.024) or stage IC (5-year CSS 75.1% vs. 86.7%, p = 0.170).

Discussion

The study provided population-based estimates of risk factors and prognoses in patients with OC and with FSS as well as the survival outcomes of patients with stage I EOC and the effect of chemotherapy. The constructed nomograms exhibited superior prognostic discrimination and survival prediction for patients with stage I EOC.

Oncologic outcomes of fertility-sparing surgery in early stage epithelial ovarian cancer: a population-based propensity score-matched analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety of fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) in reproductive women (younger than 50 years) with early epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

METHODS

Reproductive women diagnosed with stage I EOC in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database were identified. Surgeries that did not undergo hysterectomy and/or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy were categorized as FSS, whereas non-FSS included bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and hysterectomy. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was conducted to balance the covariates. Risk factor was identified by COX analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves were performed to evaluate the overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS).

RESULTS

3556 patients with stage I EOC were identified and divided into non-FSS group and FSS group. After PSM, 625 pairs of patients with stage I EOC were included. FSS was not inferior to non-FSS in the OS curve [HR 0.9127, 95% CI (0.6971 ~ 0.1.195), P = 0.5174; HR: 0.9378, 95% CI (0.6358 ~ 0.1.383), P = 0.7460] and the CSS curve [HR 0.8284, 95% CI (0.5932 ~ 1.157), P = 0.2949; HR 0.9003, 95% CI (0.5470 ~ 1.482), P = 0.6803] both in overall cohort and in matched cohort. Univariate COX analysis identified older age (45-49), moderate-differentiated to un-differentiation grade, IC stage, bigger tumor size (> 10 cm) and chemotherapy as risk factors of prognostic outcome (P < 0.1). Not only in univariate subgroup analyses but also in bivariate factors subgroup analysis, the evidence was not enough to regard FSS as a harmful factor compared with non-FSS.

CONCLUSIONS

Fertility-sparing surgery was comparable to non-FSS in terms of survival in reproductive women with stage I EOC. Patients with high-risk factors could also consider FSS as an effective alternative compared with non-FSS.

Fertility-Sparing Treatment of Patients with Endometrial Cancer: A Review of the Literature

Endometrial cancer (EC) is currently the most common malignancy of the female genital tract in developed countries. Although it is more common in postmenopausal women, it may affect up to 25% in the premenopausal age and 3–5% under the age of 40 years. Furthermore, in the last decades a significant shift to pregnancy at older maternal ages, particularly in resource-rich countries, has been observed. Therefore, in this scenario fertility-sparing alternatives should be discussed with patients affected by EC. This study summarizes available literature on fertility-sparing management of patients affected by EC, focusing on the oncologic and reproductive outcomes. A systematic computerized search of the literature was performed in two electronic databases (PubMed and MEDLINE) in order to identify relevant articles to be included for the purpose of this systematic review. On the basis of available evidence, fertility-sparing alternatives are oral progestins alone or in combination with other drugs, levonorgestrel intrauterine system and hysteroscopic resection in association with progestin therapies. These strategies seem feasible and safe for young patients with G1 endometrioid EC limited to the endometrium. However, there is a lack of high-quality evidence on the efficacy and safety of fertility-sparing treatments and future well-designed studies are required.

Post-Conization FIGO stage IA1 squamous cell cervical carcinoma; is hysterectomy necessary?

OBJECTIVE

To compare and evaluate the results and suitability of two different approaches to the treatment of post-conization International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IA1 cervical carcinoma: a more radical approach, directly scheduling a second surgery versus a more conservative one, which consists of performing a cotest (PAP plus HPV-test) in a follow-up visit and deciding whether to apply a second surgery on the basis of the results.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective descriptive study including 144 cases of stage IA1 cervical carcinoma diagnosed after a loop electrosurgical excisional procedure (conization), between 1987 and 2019 in the Mother-and-Child University Hospital of Gran Canaria (Spain). Selected patients were split into two groups for analysis: patients directly undergoing a second surgical intervention (hysterectomy or re-conization) after diagnosis and patients who were followed-up before making a decision whether to schedule a second surgery or continue to follow-up.

RESULTS

75% of women directly receiving a second surgical intervention (no post-conization follow-up) underwent hysterectomy, while 25% underwent re-conization. Histological outcomes from hysterectomized patients showed 65% negative results for intraepithelial lesions, 9% low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL), 16% high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) and only 10.5% confirmed invasive lesions: hysterectomy complication rate was 7%. Histological studies from women subjected to re-conization showed 32% negative results, 37% LSIL, 5% HSIL and 26% malignancy. In the group of patients who were followed-up after diagnosis, 8.8% needed a second intervention; none of them showed negative histological results, while 100% hysterectomized and 25% patients with re-conization showed HSIL. No unnecessary hysterectomy procedures were conducted in this group. HPV-16 was the most common genotype in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Conization proved to be a suitable alternative to hysterectomy as a treatment for post-conization stage IA1 cervical cancer. Our results showed that 65% hysterectomy procedures conducted without previously monitoring for residual disease corresponded to negative results and were therefore, unnecessary. We conclude that confirmation of the presence of residual disease by using cotest is essential to make a decision on further treatment and that a conservative management is often possible and, in our opinion, preferable.