Trends in Use and Effect on Survival of Simple Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

Controversies and Advances in the Personalized Surgical Treatment of Cervical Cancer

Cervical cancer represents a global health issue as it is mostly encountered in women of reproductive age, while at the same time, survival outcomes seem to have remained constant during the last two decades. The need to implement fertility-sparing strategies as well as to decrease the morbidity that accompanies radical treatment has been extensively studied. During the last decade, several randomized clinical trials have been released, resulting in significant advances in the surgical treatment of early-stage disease. At the same time, evidence about the surgical treatment of advanced-stage disease as well as recurrent disease has gradually appeared and seems to be promising, thus leading the point forward towards personalized medicine that will remove the surgical barriers that seem concrete in our era. Nevertheless, the discrepancies in perioperative morbidity and survival outcomes that were observed among published studies raise several questions. In the present article, we chose to review the gray fields in the surgical treatment of early-stage and advanced-stage cervical cancer. Studies that are based on strong evidence that support current clinical practice are compared to smaller cohorts that present novel data that may form the basis for future research, and issues that remain poorly explored are discussed in an effort to help establish a consensus for future research development.

Efficacy and safety analysis of non-radical surgery for early-stage cervical cancer (IA2 ~ IB1): a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

Radical hysterectomy has long been considered as the standard surgical treatment for early-stage cervical cancer (IA2 to IB1 stages), according to the 2009 International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology. This study aims to conduct an in-depth evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of non-radical surgery as an alternative treatment for patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

Methods

A systematic search of online databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify relevant literature on surgical treatment options for early-stage cervical cancer. Keywords such as "cervical cancer," "conservative surgery," "early-stage," "less radical surgery," and "simple hysterectomy" were used. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.0 software, which included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies.

Results

This meta-analysis included 8 eligible articles covering 9 studies, with 3,950 patients in the simple hysterectomy (SH) surgery group and 6,271 patients in the radical hysterectomy (RH) surgery group. The results indicate that there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the Overall Survival (OS) (HR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.86-1.27, p = 0.671; Heterogeneity: I2 = 33.8%, p = 0.170), Disease Free Survival (DFS) (HR = 1.39, 95% CI: 0.59-3.29, p = 0.456; Heterogeneity: I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.374), Cervical Cancer Specific Survival (CCSS) (HR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.80-1.54, p = 0.519; Heterogeneity: I2 = 11.9%, p = 0.287) and recurrence rate (RR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.69-1.97, p = 0.583; Heterogeneity: I = 0.0%, p = 0.488). However, the mortality rate (RR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.10-1.67, p = 0.006; Heterogeneity: I2 = 35.4%, p = 0.158) and the rate of postoperative adjuvant therapy (RR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.16-2.19, p = 0.004; Heterogeneity: I2 = 92.7%, p < 0.10) were higher in the SH group compared to those in the RH group. On the other hand, the incidence of surgical complications was lower in the SH group (RR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.21-0.59, p = 0.004; Heterogeneity: I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.857) than that in the RH group. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients in the IB1 stage SH group had a significantly higher mortality rate compared to those in the RH group (RR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.23-2.07, p < 0.001; Heterogeneity: I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.332). However, there was no significant difference in mortality rates between the two groups for patients at stage IA2 (RR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.54-1.30, p = 0.428; Heterogeneity: I2 = 26.8%, p = 0.243). In the subgroups positive for Lymphovascular Space Invasion (LVSI), patients in the SH group had a significantly higher mortality rate than those in the RH group (RR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.09-1.65, p = 0.005; Heterogeneity: I2 = 41.6%, p = 0.128). However, in the LVSI-negative subgroups, there was no significant difference in mortality rates between the two groups (RR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.01-8.04, p = 0.499).

Conclusion

For patients with early-stage cervical cancer patients at IA2 without LVSI involvement, comparisons between the two groups in terms of OS, DFS, CCSS, recurrence rate, and mortality rates revealed no statistically significant differences, indicating that the choice of surgical approach does not affect long-term survival outcomes for this specific patient group. For patients at IB1 and IA2 stages with LVSI involvement, while there were no significant differences between the two groups in OS, DFS, CSS, and recurrence rate, a significant increase in mortality rates was observed in the SH group. This indicates a potential elevated risk of mortality associated with SH in this subset of patients. Notably, the incidence of surgical complications was significantly lower in the SH group compared to the RH group, highlighting the safety profile of SH in this context. Significantly, among patients in the SH group, an increase in the rate of postoperative adjuvant treatment is associated with a higher occurrence of treatment-related complications. To facilitate more precise patient selection for conservative surgical management, future prospective studies of superior quality are imperative to gain deeper insights into this matter.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO (CRD42023451609: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023451609).

Simple hysterectomy versus radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis aims to compare the surgery-related results and oncological outcomes between SH and RH in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

METHOD

We systematically searched databases including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane to collect studies that compared oncological and surgery-related outcomes between SH and RH groups in patients with stage IA2 and IB1 cervical cancer. A random-effect model calculated the weighted average difference of each primary outcome via Review Manager V.5.4.

RESULT

Seven studies comprising 6977 patients were included into our study. For oncological outcomes, we found no statistical difference in recurrence rate [OR = 0.88; 95% CI (0.50, 1.57); P = 0.68] and Overall Survival (OS) [OR = 1.23; 95% CI (0.69, 2.19), P = 0.48]. No difference was detected in the prevalence of positive LVSI and lymph nodes metastasis between the two groups. Concerning surgery-related outcomes, the comprehensive effects revealed that the bladder injury [OR = 0.28; 95% CI (0.08, 0.94), P = 0.04] and bladder disfunction [OR = 0.10; 95% CI (0.02, 0.53), P = 0.007] of the RH group were higher compared to the SH group.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggested there are no significant differences in terms of both recurrence rate and overall survival among patients with stage IA2-IB1 cervical cancer undergoing SH or RH, while the SH group has better surgery-related outcomes. These data confirm the need to narrow the indication for RH in early-stage cervical cancer.

De-escalation of surgical radicality for non-fertility preserving management in patients with early-stage cervical cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the oncologic outcomes of simple hysterectomy in patients with low-risk early-stage cervical cancer (tumors ≤2 cm with limited stromal invasion).

METHODS

This study was registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42023433840) following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist. MEDLINE (through Ovid), EmMBASEbase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception until June 2023. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies with two arms of comparison (simple hysterectomy with lymph node assessment vs radical hysterectomy with lymph node assessment) in patients with low-risk early-stage cervical cancer were considered.

RESULTS

The search identified 1270 articles; eighteen studies were considered potentially eligible after removing duplicates, and four met the selection criteria. Three studies were randomized controlled trials, and the other was a retrospective cohort study. In total, 981 patients were included. There were 485 (49.4%) and 496 (50.6%) patients in the simple hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy groups, respectively. Simple hysterectomy with lymph node assessment was not associated with a higher risk of death at 5 years (RR 0.98, 95% CI: 0.31 to 3.10; I2=0%, two randomized controlled trials, 141 patients, for an absolute risk reduction of zero percentage points [95% CI -9.0 to 9.0]), pelvic recurrence at 3 years (97.5% and 97.8% for simple hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy, respectively, p=0.79), and overall recurrence at 3 years (95 %% and 100% for simple hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy, respectively, p=0.30).

CONCLUSION

Simple hysterectomy with lymph node evaluation for low-risk early-stage cervical cancer is not associated with a detrimental effect on oncologic outcomes and has a better morbidity profile.

Simple versus Radical Hysterectomy in Women with Low-Risk Cervical Cancer

BACKGROUND

Retrospective data suggest that the incidence of parametrial infiltration is low in patients with early-stage low-risk cervical cancer, which raises questions regarding the need for radical hysterectomy in these patients. However, data from large, randomized trials comparing outcomes of radical and simple hysterectomy are lacking.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing radical hysterectomy with simple hysterectomy including lymph-node assessment in patients with low-risk cervical cancer (lesions of ≤2 cm with limited stromal invasion). The primary outcome was cancer recurrence in the pelvic area (pelvic recurrence) at 3 years. The prespecified noninferiority margin for the between-group difference in pelvic recurrence at 3 years was 4 percentage points.

RESULTS

Among 700 patients who underwent randomization (350 in each group), the majority had tumors that were stage IB1 according to the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) criteria (91.7%), that had squamous-cell histologic features (61.7%), and that were grade 1 or 2 (59.3%). With a median follow-up time of 4.5 years, the incidence of pelvic recurrence at 3 years was 2.17% in the radical hysterectomy group and 2.52% in the simple hysterectomy group (an absolute difference of 0.35 percentage points; 90% confidence interval, -1.62 to 2.32). Results were similar in a per-protocol analysis. The incidence of urinary incontinence was lower in the simple hysterectomy group than in the radical hysterectomy group within 4 weeks after surgery (2.4% vs. 5.5%; P = 0.048) and beyond 4 weeks (4.7% vs. 11.0%; P = 0.003). The incidence of urinary retention in the simple hysterectomy group was also lower than that in the radical hysterectomy group within 4 weeks after surgery (0.6% vs. 11.0%; P<0.001) and beyond 4 weeks (0.6% vs. 9.9%; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with low-risk cervical cancer, simple hysterectomy was not inferior to radical hysterectomy with respect to the 3-year incidence of pelvic recurrence and was associated with a lower risk of urinary incontinence or retention. (Funded by the Canadian Cancer Society and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01658930.).

A Case for the Conservative Management of Stage IA Cervical Cancer

Cervical cancer remains a significant public health concern within the United States and across the world. Cervical cancer is most frequently diagnosed in women between the ages of 35 and 44 and therefore affects a younger patient population than many other cancers. The management of early-stage disease has frequently utilized radical hysterectomy with the associated increased surgical morbidity, without clear evidence of any benefits. In stage IA disease, there are retrospective pathologic data supporting the safety of conservative surgery and lymphadenectomy over radical hysterectomy. There are also emerging prospective studies supporting conservative management. This editorial presents the evidence for conservative management of stage IA cervical cancer by reviewing the existing retrospective studies as well as the ongoing prospective studies.

Improving cervical cancer survival-A multifaceted strategy to sustain progress for this global problem

Cervical cancer is associated with profound socioeconomic and racial disparities in incidence, mortality, morbidity, and years of life lost. The last standard-of-care treatment innovation for locally advanced cervical cancer occurred in 1999, when cisplatin chemotherapy was added to pelvic radiation therapy (chemoradiation therapy). Chemoradiation therapy is associated with a 30%-50% failure rate, and there is currently no cure for recurrent or metastatic disease. The enormity of the worldwide clinical problem of cervical cancer morbidity and mortality as well as the egregiously unchanged mortality rate over the last several decades are recognized by the National Institutes of Health as urgent priorities. This is reflected within the Office of Research on Women's Health effort to advance National Institutes of Health research on the health of women, as highlighted in a recent symposium. In the current review, the authors address the state of the science and opportunities to improve cervical cancer survival with an emphasis on improving access, using technology in innovative and widely implementable ways, and improving current understanding of cervical cancer biology. LAY SUMMARY: Cervical cancer is associated with profound socioeconomic and racial disparities in incidence, mortality, morbidity, and years of life lost. In this review, the state of the science and opportunities to improve cervical cancer survival are presented with an emphasis on improving access, using technology in innovative and widely implementable ways, and improving current understanding of cervical cancer biology.

Is less more in the surgical treatment of early-stage cervical cancer?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article discusses recent developments towards less radical surgical treatment for early-stage cervical cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Surgery is the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. In the last decades, new treatment strategies have been developed aiming to reduce morbidity, without hampering oncological safety. We provide an update of the latest knowledge on safety and morbidity following less radical surgical procedures in early-stage cervical cancer. In cervical cancer with a tumour size of 2 cm or less, radical surgery (simple hysterectomy or fertility-sparing conisation) may be a well tolerated option. For patients with larger lesions (>2 cm) and wishing to preserve fertility, administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by less extensive surgery appears to be a feasible and well tolerated alternative to abdominal trachelectomy. With regard to lymph node assessment, increasing evidence shows the feasibility of the sentinel lymph node procedure instead of full pelvic lymphadenectomy. Prospective trials reporting on oncological safety are awaited.It is important to exercise caution when new surgical strategies are introduced. Despite promising retrospective data, prospective randomized studies may present unexpected results, for instance, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy showed inferior results compared to laparotomy.

SUMMARY

There is a shift towards less radical treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. This review explores whether and when less is really more.

Minimally invasive versus open surgery for women with stage 1A1 and stage 1A2 cervical cancer: A retrospective database cohort study

Background

Recent studies comparing minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer have reported a worse overall survival with minimally invasive surgery (MIS). However, in the patients with microscopic disease, there was no survival difference and the optimal surgical approach for microscopic cervical cancer remains unclear.

Methods

Using the National Cancer Database, we identified a cohort of women who underwent hysterectomy as the primary treatment for stage IA1/IA2 cervical cancer between January 2010 and December 2016. Using multivariable logistic regression, our primary outcome was to compare overall survival between the open and MIS groups. The data was stratified for simple and radical hysterectomies. Secondary endpoint was comparison of readmission rates and length of stay (LOS).

Results

We identified 6230 patients with stage IA1 and IA2 cervical cancer that underwent hysterectomy as primary treatment. 4054 of these women (65%) underwent MIS. There was no difference in age, lympho-vascular invasion, number of lymph nodes retrieved and histology between the two groups. In the overall cohort, there was no difference in survival between the open and the MIS group (Hazard ratio for the open group 1.23; CI 0.92–1.63). Post-operative radiation therapy was more common in the open group (5.24% vs 4.09%, p value < 0.02). The mean LOS (1.35 days vs 3.08 days) was shorter in MIS group (p value < 0.0001). No difference was found in the readmission rates (60% for the MIS group vs 55% for the open group; p value 0.14).

Conclusions

Our data suggest that MIS is associated with similar overall survival and shorter length of hospital stay compared to the open hysterectomy in women with stage IA cervical cancer. Based on this large data set, MIS appears to be a safe and effective surgical approach for women with stage IA1/IA2 cervical cancer.

•

Our study is the largest analysis to date on the use of MIS in stage-IA cervical cancer.

•

There was no difference in overall survival between MIS and open surgery for stage IA cervical cancer.

•

MIS was associated with a shorter length of stay. No difference was found in readmission rates.

•

The two groups were similar for lympho-vascular invasion, number of lymph nodes retrieved, histology, and age.

Simple Hysterectomy for Patients with Stage IA2 Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective

The purpose of this study was to compare long-term survival outcomes of simple hysterectomy versus radical hysterectomy in stage IA2 cervical cancer.

Methods

A total of 440 patients who underwent simple hysterectomy (SH group) or radical hysterectomy (RH group) between 2014 and 2019 were included in this study. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by the Log rank test. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was employed to control for confounders.

Results

There were 258 patients in the RH group and 182 patients in the SH group. The two groups had similar 5-year DFS rate (89.25% vs 91.14%, P=0.562) and 5-year OS rate (95.71% vs 94.76%, P=0.482). Multivariable analysis showed that simple hysterectomy was not independently associated with poorer DFS (aHR, 1.608; 95% CI, 0.640–4.041; P=0.312) and OS (aHR, 1.122; 95% CI, 0.319–3.493; P=0.858) than radical hysterectomy for women with stage IA2 cervical cancer.

Conclusion

For stage IA2 cervical cancer, a simple hysterectomy is safe and effective. Further studies are needed to testify against our findings.

ConCerv: a prospective trial of conservative surgery for low-risk early-stage cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the ConCerv Trial was to prospectively evaluate the feasibility of conservative surgery in women with early-stage, low-risk cervical cancer.

METHODS

From April 2010 to March 2019, a prospective, single-arm, multicenter study evaluated conservative surgery in participants from 16 sites in nine countries. Eligibility criteria included: (1) FIGO 2009 stage IA2-IB1 cervical carcinoma; (2) squamous cell (any grade) or adenocarcinoma (grade 1 or 2 only) histology; (3) tumor size <2 cm; (4) no lymphovascular space invasion; (5) depth of invasion <10 mm; (6) negative imaging for metastatic disease; and (7) negative conization margins. Cervical conization was performed to determine eligibility, with one repeat cone permitted. Eligible women desiring fertility preservation underwent a second surgery with pelvic lymph node assessment, consisting of sentinel lymph node biopsy and/or full pelvic lymph node dissection. Those not desiring fertility preservation underwent simple hysterectomy with lymph node assessment. Women who had undergone an 'inadvertent' simple hysterectomy with an unexpected post-operative diagnosis of cancer were also eligible if they met the above inclusion criteria and underwent a second surgery with pelvic lymph node dissection only.

RESULTS

100 evaluable patients were enrolled. Median age at surgery was 38 years (range 23-67). Stage was IA2 (33%) and IB1 (67%). Surgery included conization followed by lymph node assessment in 44 women, conization followed by simple hysterectomy with lymph node assessment in 40 women, and inadvertent simple hysterectomy followed by lymph node dissection in 16 women. Positive lymph nodes were noted in 5 patients (5%). Residual disease in the post-conization hysterectomy specimen was noted in 1/40 patients-that is, an immediate failure rate of 2.5%. Median follow-up was 36.3 months (range 0.0-68.3). Three patients developed recurrent disease within 2 years of surgery-that is, a cumulative incidence of 3.5% (95% CI 0.9% to 9.0%).

DISCUSSION

Our prospective data show that select patients with early-stage, low-risk cervical carcinoma may be offered conservative surgery.

iPMI: Machine Learning-Aided Identification of Parametrial Invasion in Women with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

Radical hysterectomy is a recommended treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. However, the procedure is associated with significant morbidities resulting from the removal of the parametrium. Parametrial cancer invasion (PMI) is found in a minority of patients but the efficient system used to predict it is lacking. In this study, we develop a novel machine learning (ML)-based predictive model based on a random forest model (called iPMI) for the practical identification of PMI in women. Data of 1112 stage IA-IIA cervical cancer patients who underwent primary surgery were collected and considered as the training dataset, while data from an independent cohort of 116 consecutive patients were used as the independent test dataset. Based on these datasets, iPMI-Econ was then developed by using basic clinicopathological data available prior to surgery, while iPMI-Power was also introduced by adding pelvic node metastasis and uterine corpus invasion to the iPMI-Econ. Both 10-fold cross-validations and independent test results showed that iPMI-Power outperformed other well-known ML classifiers (e.g., logistic regression, decision tree, k-nearest neighbor, multi-layer perceptron, naive Bayes, support vector machine, and extreme gradient boosting). Upon comparison, it was found that iPMI-Power was effective and had a superior performance to other well-known ML classifiers in predicting PMI. It is anticipated that the proposed iPMI may serve as a cost-effective and rapid approach to guide important clinical decision-making.

Less radical surgery for early-stage cervical cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review was performed to examine the outcomes of simple hysterectomy for women with low-risk, early-stage cervical cancer.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception until November 4, 2020.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Original research reporting recurrence or survival outcomes among women with early-stage cervical cancer (defined as stage IA2 to IB1 disease) who were treated with simple hysterectomy.

METHODS

Data regarding study characteristics, tumor characteristics, other treatment modalities, adjuvant therapy, recurrence, and survival outcomes were analyzed. Studies that reported both simple hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy outcomes were compared in a subgroup analysis. Summary statistics were reported and eligible studies were further analyzed to determine an estimated hazard ratio comparing simple hysterectomy with radical hysterectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were included, of which 3 were randomized control trials, 14 retrospective studies, 2 prospective studies, and 2 population-level data sets. The cohort included 2662 women who underwent simple hysterectomy, of which 36.1% had stage IA2 disease and 61.0% stage IB1 disease. Most cases (96.8%) involved tumors of ≤2 cm in size, and 15.4% of cases were lymphovascular space invasion positive. Approximately 71.8% of women who underwent simple hysterectomy had a lymph node assessment, and 30.7% of women underwent adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation. The most common complications described were lymphedema (24%), lymphocysts (22%), and urinary incontinence (18.5%). The total death rate for studies that reported deaths was 5.5%. By stage, there was a 2.7% mortality rate among IA2 disease and a 7.3% mortality rate among IB1 disease. Of note, 18 studies reported outcomes for both simple and radical hysterectomy, with a 4.5% death rate in the radical hysterectomy group and a 5.8% death rate in the simple hysterectomy group. Estimated and reported hazard ratio demonstrated no significant association for mortality between radical and nonradical surgeries for IA2 disease but potentially increased risk of mortality among IB1 disease. All studies had a moderate to high risk of bias, including the 3 randomized control trials. Level of evidence was limited to III to IV.

CONCLUSION

The use of less radical surgery for women with stage IA2 and small volume IB1 cervical cancers appears favorable. However, there is concern that simple hysterectomy in women with stage IB1 tumors may adversely impact survival. Overall, the quality of studies available is modest, limiting the conclusions that can be drawn from the available literature.

Radical trachelectomy

Radical trachelectomy is the 'cornerstone' of fertility-sparing surgery in patients with early-stage cervical cancer wishing to preserve fertility. Growing evidence has demonstrated the oncologic safety and subsequent favorable pregnancy outcomes in well-selected cases. In the absence of prospective trials, the decision on the appropriate surgical approach (vaginal, open, or minimally invasive surgery) should be based on local resources and surgeons' preferences. Radical trachelectomy has the potential to preserve fertility in a large proportion of women with early-stage cervical cancer. However, prematurity and premature rupture of membranes are common obstetric complications after radical trachelectomy for cervical cancer. A multidisciplinary approach is crucial to optimize the balance between oncologic and obstetric outcomes. The purpose of this review is to provide an updated overview of the technical, oncologic, and obstetric aspects of radical trachelectomy.

Clair CM, Ananth CV, Neugut AI, Hershman DL, Wright JD. Cost of care for the initial management of cervical cancer in women with commercial insurance

BACKGROUND

Women with newly diagnosed cervical cancer are often treated with extensive, multimodal therapies that may include a combination of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. Little is known about the cost of treatment or how these costs are passed on to the patients.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to examine the cost of care during the first year after a diagnosis of cervical cancer, to estimate the sources of the costs, and to explore the out-of-pocket costs.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a study of women with commercial insurance who received a new diagnosis of cervical cancer, and whose cases were recorded in the MarketScan database from 2008 to 2016. Patients were categorized based on the primary treatment received being either surgery (hysterectomy with or without adjuvant radiation or chemotherapy) or radiation. The inflation-adjusted medical expenditures for a 12-month period beginning on the date of the first treatment were estimated. The payments were divided into the expenditures of inpatient care, outpatient care (including chemotherapy), and outpatient pharmacy costs. The out-of-pocket costs incurred by the patients in the form of copayments, coinsurance, and deductibles were estimated.

RESULTS

A total of 4495 patients, including 3014 (67%) who underwent surgery and 1481 (33%) who primarily underwent radiotherapy, were identified. The median total expenditure per patient during the first year after the diagnosis was $56,250 (interquartile range, $25,767-$107,532). The median total expenditure for patients with surgery as the primary treatment was $37,222 (interquartile range, $20,957-$75,555). The median total expenditure for patients treated primarily with radiotherapy was $101,266 (interquartile range, $63,155-$160,760). For patients treated primarily with surgery, inpatient services accounted for $15,145 (interquartile range, $0-$26,898), outpatient services accounted for $18,430 (interquartile range, $5354-$48,047), and outpatient pharmacy costs accounted for $628 (interquartile range, $141-$1847). The median cost for those women who did not require adjuvant therapy was $26,164 compared with $89,760 for women treated with adjuvant radiation. The median out-of-pocket costs for the cohort was $2253 (interquartile range, $1137-$3990) or 3.9% of the total costs.

CONCLUSION

The cost of care for women with newly diagnosed cervical cancer is substantial. Overall, patients are responsible for approximately 3.9% of the costs in the form of out-of-pocket expenditures.

Endocervical Adenocarcinoma, Gross Examination, and Processing, Including Intraoperative Evaluation: Recommendations From the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists

The International Society of Gynecological Pathologists (ISGyP) Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Project aims to provide evidence-based guidance for the pathologic evaluation, classification, and reporting of endocervical adenocarcinoma. This review presents the recommendations pertaining to gross evaluation and intraoperative consultation of specimens obtained from patients in the setting of cervical cancer. The recommendations are the product of review of published peer-reviewed evidence, international guidelines and institutional grossing manuals, as well as deliberation within this working group. The discussion presented herein details the approach to the different specimen types encountered in practice: loop electrosurgical excision procedure, cone, trachelectomy, radical hysterectomy, pelvic exenteration, and lymphadenectomy specimens. Guidelines for intraoperative evaluation of trachelectomy and sentinel lymph node specimens are also addressed. Correlation with ISGyP recommendations on cancer staging, which appear as a separate review in this issue, is also included when appropriate. While conceived in the framework of endocervical adenocarcinoma, most of the discussion and recommendations can also be applied to other cervical malignancies.

Simple vaginal trachelectomy in women with early-stage low-risk cervical cancer who wish to preserve fertility: the new standard of care?

OBJECTIVE

There is a trend toward less radical surgery in women with small-volume disease who wish to preserve fertility. The objective of our study was to evaluate the oncologic and obstetrical outcome of simple vaginal trachelectomy and lymph node assessment in patients with low-risk early-stage cervical cancer (<2 cm).

METHODS

From May 2007 to January 2020, 50 patients underwent a simple vaginal trachelectomy/conization with laparoscopic sentinel lymph node mapping±complete pelvic node dissection. Patients underwent loop electrocautery excision (LEEP), cone/cervical biopsies, or simple trachelectomy. A preoperative pelvic MRI with gadolinium contrast was systematically performed in all cases. The size of the lesion was established by review of the LEEP, cone or trachelectomy specimen, MRI, and clinical examination. Data was collected prospectively in a computerized database. Descriptive statistics and the Kaplan-Meier estimate were used for analysis.

RESULTS

The median age was 29 years (range: 21-44) and 35 (70%) patients were nulliparous. As per FIGO 2009 classification, 11 patients had stage IA1 with lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), 13 patients had stage IA2, and 26 patients had stage IB1. Twenty-six patients had squamous histology, 20 patients adenocarcinoma, and four patients other histologies. On final pathology, lymph nodes were negative in 46 patients (92%), three patients had isolated tumor cells, and one patient had micrometastasis. Thirty patients (60%) had either no residual disease in the trachelectomy specimen (22) or residual dysplasia only (eight). With a median follow-up of 76 months (range: 1-140), only one local recurrence occurred which was treated initially with chemoradiation. She recurred again locally and underwent a pelvic exenteration: the patient progressed again and died of disease. The 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival was 97.9% and 97.6%, respectively. There were 40 pregnancies: five (12.5%) ended in the first trimester, one (2.5%) in the second trimester, and three (7.5%) were late preterm: all the others (30 or 75%) delivered >36 weeks and one pregnancy is ongoing.

CONCLUSION

Simple trachelectomy/conization and lymph node assessment is an oncologically safe fertility-preserving surgery in well-selected patients with low-risk early-stage cervical cancer (<2 cm). Obstetrical outcomes are comparable to the general population.

Impact of hospital volume on surgical management and outcomes for early-stage cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether process and outcome measures varied for patients with early-stage cervical cancer based on hospital surgical volume.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, we identified women with stages IA2 - IB1 cervical cancer (2011-2013). Annual hospital volume was calculated using number of hysterectomies performed in the prior year and grouped into patient level-quartiles. Centers in the highest quartile of volume were defined as HVCs; those in the lowest quartile, as LVCs. Demographics, type/mode of hysterectomy, lymph node assessment, NCCN-compliant surgery (radical hysterectomy (RH) with LND), and survival outcomes were compared across quartiles of hospital volume. Cox Proportional Hazards model was performed to determine impact of volume on mortality.

RESULTS

We identified 3469 women treated at 598 different hospitals. RH was more likely at HVCs versus LVCs (68.9% vs. 59.6%, p < 0.001). LND was more likely at HVCs versus LVCs (96.1% vs 87.3%, p < 0.001). Patients treated at HVCs were 11.4% more likely to receive guideline-compliant surgery compared to LVCs (67.8% vs. 56.4%, p < 0.001). There was no difference in 5-year survival, 90-day survival, all-cause mortality across volume quartiles. Thirty-day mortality was significantly lower at HVCs (0 deaths in 880 patients) versus LVCs (1 in 1058 (0.1%, p = 0.02)). Age ≥ 80, Medicaid and Medicare insurance, Hispanic race, and poorly differentiated histology were independent predictors of mortality. Hospital volume was not found to be an independent predictor of mortality (p = 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

HVCs demonstrated higher rates of NCCN-recommended surgery for early-stage cervical cancer. There was no association between hospital volume and survival.