Minimally Invasive Surgery for Cervical Cancer in Light of the LACC Trial: What Have We Learned?

Safety of vaginal surgery for early-stage cervical cancer: A retrospective multicenter cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Abdominal Radical hysterectomy (ARH) with pelvic lymph node assessment is considered the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. Accepted routes have previously included laparoscopic or robotic approaches (LRH). Laparoscopy-assisted vaginal or vaginal radical hysterectomy (LVRH) are performed in some centers. The objective of this study is to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of LVRH, to laparoscopic and abdominal approaches.

DESIGN PATIENTS SETTING

A retrospective multicenter analysis of consecutive cervical cancer cases who underwent a radical hysterectomy between 2007 and 2017 in eleven regional cancer centers across Canada.

MEASUREMENTS

A comparison of patients stratified by surgical technique was undertaken. T-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum and chi-square were used to compare patient characteristics. Log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models were employed to compare recurrence and survival across surgical groups.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1071 patients with cervical cancer stage IA1 with lymphovascular invasion to stage IIIC (FIGO 2018) <4 cm were identified. Postoperative complication rate was lowest for women undergoing LVRH (9.1 %, vs 18.3 % and 22.1 % for minimally invasive and open respectively). During follow up, 114 women recurred, and 70 women died. 5-year recurrence-free survival was 85.4 % for LRH, 89.4 % for ARH and 92.2 % for LVRH. LVRH was not found to be associated with a higher risk of recurrence or death than ARH on multivariable analysis (aHR for recurrence 0.62, CI 0.21-1.77; aHR for death 0.63, CI 0.14-2.77) CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, vaginal or laparoscopy-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer was associated with favorable perioperative and oncological outcomes.

Oncological outcomes of minimally invasive surgery in non-endometrioid endometrial Cancer patients with varying prognostic risks: a retrospective cohort study based on the ESGO/ESTRO/ESP 2020 guidelines

BACKGROUND

Non-endometrioid endometrial carcinomas (NEEC) are characterized by their rarity and adverse prognoses. This study evaluates the outcomes of open versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in NEEC patients stratified by prognostic risks according to the 2020 ESGO-ESTRO-ESP risk classification guidelines.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 99 NEEC patients who underwent initial surgery at Fujian University Cancer Hospital. Patients were categorized into two groups: those undergoing MIS and those undergoing open surgery. We compared disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between these groups. Cox regression analysis was employed to identify risk factors for DFS, which were further validated via bootstrap statistical methods.

RESULTS

The study included 31 patients in the MIS group and 68 in the open surgery group. The demographics and clinical characteristics such as age, body mass index, comorbidities, histological subtypes, and FIGO stage were similar between groups (P > 0.05). The MIS group experienced ten recurrences (1 vaginal, 2 lymph nodes, 7 distant metastases), whereas the open surgery group had seven recurrences (1 vaginal, 3 lymph nodes, 1 pelvis, 2 distant metastases), yielding recurrence rates of 10.3% versus 25.6% (P = 0.007). Besides lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), surgical approach was also identified as an independent prognostic factor for DFS in high-risk patients (P = 0.037, 95% CI: 1.062-7.409). The constructed nomogram demonstrated a robust predictive capability with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767. Survival analysis for high- and intermediate-risk patients showed no significant differences in OS between the two groups (Phigh risk = 0.275; Pintermediate-risk = 0.201). However, high-risk patients in the MIS group exhibited significantly worse DFS (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This investigation is the inaugural study to assess the impact of surgical approaches on NEEC patients within the framework of the latest ESGO-ESTRO-ESP risk classifications. Although MIS may offer clinical advantages, it should be approached with caution in high-risk NEEC patients due to associated poorer DFS outcomes.

Development and Validation of Radiomics-Based Models for Predicting the Parametrial Invasion in Stage IB1 to IIA2 Cervical Cancer

Objective

To develop an early warning system that enables accurate parametrial invasion (PMI) risk prediction in cervical cancer patients with early-stage.

Methods

We retrospectively collected 218 early-stage cervical cancer patients who were treated in Jingzhou Central Hospital from January 31, 2015, to January 31, 2023, and diagnosed with early stage cervical cancer by pathology. The prediction model training is achieved by randomly dividing 70% of the training queue population, with the remaining 30% used as the testing queue. Then, a prediction model based on machine learning algorithms (including random forest, generalized linear regression, decision tree, support vector machine, and artificial neural network) is constructed to predict the risk of PMI occurrence. Ultimately, the analysis of receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) and decision curve analysis (DCA) is used to evaluate the predictive ability of various prediction models.

Results

We finally included radiomics-based candidate variables that can be used for PMI model. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that energy, correlation, sum entropy (SUE), entropy, mean sum (MES), variance of differences (DIV), and inverse difference (IND) were independent risk factors for PMI occurrence. The predictive performance AUC of five types of machine learning ranges from 0.747 to 0.895 in the training set and can also reach a high accuracy of 0.905 in the testing set, indicating that the predictive model has ideal robustness.

Conclusion

Our ML-based model incorporating GLCM parameters can predict PMI in cervical cancer patients with stage IB1 to IIA2, particularly the RFM, which could contribute to distinguishing PMI before surgery, especially in assisting decision-making on surgical scope.

Cervical cancer: a new era

Cervical cancer is a major global health issue, ranking as the fourth most common cancer in women worldwide. Depending on stage, histology, and patient factors, the standard management of cervical cancer is a combination of treatment approaches, including (fertility- or non-fertility-sparing) surgery, radiotherapy, platinum-based chemotherapy, and novel systemic therapies such as bevacizumab, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and antibody-drug conjugates. While ambitious global initiatives seek to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the management of cervical cancer continues to evolve with major advances in imaging modalities, surgical approaches, identification of histopathological risk factors, radiotherapy techniques, and biomarker-driven personalized therapies. In particular, the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors has dramatically altered the treatment of cervical cancer, leading to significant survival benefits in both locally advanced and metastatic/recurrent settings. As the landscape of cervical cancer therapies continues to evolve, the aim of the present review is to provide a comprehensive discussion of the current state and the latest practice-changing updates in cervical cancer.

Trends in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Management in the US: A National Cancer Database Analysis

The Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial was published in 2018 and demonstrated that minimally invasive surgery (MIS) yields inferior survival outcomes in early-stage cervical cancer compared to open surgery. This study investigates how the results of the LACC trial have impacted the selection of the primary treatment modality and adjuvant radiation utilization in early-stage cervical cancer. Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we compared patients with stage IA2-IB1 cervical cancer before (1/2016-12/2017) and after (1/2019-12/2020) the LACC trial. A total of 7930 patients were included: 4609 before and 3321 after the LACC trial. There was a decline in MIS usage from 67% pre-LACC to 35% thereafter (p < 0.001). In both the pre- and post-LACC periods, patients undergoing radical MIS more frequently had small volume disease (pre-LACC tumors ≤ 2 cm, 48% MIS vs. 41% open, p = 0.023; post-LACC stage IA2, 22% vs. 15%, p = 0.002). Pre-LACC, MIS radical hysterectomy was associated with White race (82% vs. 77%, p = 0.001) and private insurance (63% vs. 54%, p = 0.004), while there was no difference in socioeconomic factors in the post-LACC period. Although the proportion of patients treated with primary chemoradiation remained stable, the post-LACC cohort had a younger median age (52.47 vs. 56.37, p = 0.005) and more microscopic disease cases (13% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.002). There was no difference in the rate of radiation after radical hysterectomy before and after the trial (26% vs. 24%, p = 0.3). Conclusions: Post-LACC, patients were less likely to undergo MIS but received adjuvant radiation at similar rates, and primary chemoradiation patients were younger and more likely to have microscopic disease.

Type and approach of hysterectomy and oncological survival of women with stage II cancer of endometrium: a large retrospective cohort study

Objective

To explore the association between the Type and approach of hysterectomy and oncological survival of women with stage II cancer of the endometrium.

Patients and methods

684 women with stage II endometrial cancer were included. Eligible cases were grouped by type of hysterectomy (simple hysterectomy or radical hysterectomy)and approach of hysterectomy (laparoscopy or laparotomy). The baseline characteristics were compared among groups. The survival outcomes (disease-free survival and overall survival) were calculated and compared among groups, and the underlying confounding factors were adjusted by the Cox proportional hazard regression analysis.

Results

The radical hysterectomy group and the simple hysterectomy group had 217 cases and 467 cases, respectively. Between the groups, the difference in 5-year disease-free survival (87.3% versus 87.9%, HR=0.97, P=0.87) and 5-year overall survival (83.8% versus 83.8%, HR=0.95, P=0.95) was not statistically significant. The laparotomy group and the laparoscopy group had 277 cases and 407 cases, respectively. Between the groups, the difference in 5-year disease-free survival (88.7% versus 87.1%, HR=1.22, P=0.34) and 5-year overall survival (85.5% versus 82.7%, HR=1.00, P=0.99) was not statistically significant.

Conclusion

For long-term oncological survival, radical hysterectomy is not superior to total hysterectomy in stage II endometrial cancer. Also, for stage II cancer of the endometrium, laparoscopic hysterectomy is as oncologically safe as open hysterectomy.

Surgery Advances in Gynecologic Tumors: The Evolution and Outcomes of Robotic Surgery for Gynecologic Cancers in a Tertiary Center

The integration of innovation into routine clinical practice is faced with many challenges. In 2007, we received the mandate to evaluate how the introduction of a robotic program in gynecologic oncology affected patient-centered care by studying its impact on clinical outcomes and hospital resource utilization. Here we summarize the history and experience of developing a robotic surgery program for gynecologic cancers over 16 years. Analysis of the data indicates that robotic surgery improved perioperative patient clinical parameters, decreased blood loss, complications, and hospital stay, maintained the oncologic outcome, and is cost-effective, resulting in it becoming the dominant surgical approach in gynecologic oncology in a tertiary cancer care institution.

Robot-assisted pelvic and renal surgery compared with laparoscopic or open surgery: Literature review of cost-effectiveness and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical experiences and cost-effectiveness by comparing robot-assisted surgery with laparoscopic- or open surgery for pelvic and renal operations.

METHODS

A narrative review was carried out.

RESULTS

When using robotic-assisted surgery, oncological and functional results are similar to after laparoscopic or open surgery. One exception may be a shorter survival in cancer of the cervix uteri. In addition, postoperative complications after robotic-assisted surgery are similar, bleeding and transfusion needs are less, and the hospital stay is shorter but the preparation of the operating theater before and after surgery and the operation times are longer. Finally, robot-assisted surgery has, in several studies, been reported to be not cost-effective primarily due to high investment costs. However, more recent studies provide improved cost-effectiveness estimates due to more effective preparation of the operating theater before surgery, improved surgeon experience, and decreased investment costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Complications and functional and oncological outcomes after robot-assisted surgery are similar to open surgery and laparoscopic surgery. The cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted surgery is likely to equal or surpass the alternatives.

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.).

Current analysis of the survival implications for minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of early-stage cervix cancer

Early-stage cervical cancer (ESCC) is managed with radical hysterectomy, a procedure that can be performed either via open surgery or minimally invasive surgery (MIS), the latter of which is accomplished via traditional laparoscopy or robotic-assisted surgery. Previously, MIS was routinely incorporated into the management of ESCC due to the approach's reduced operative morbidity and truncated hospital stay duration, but more recent clinical evidence has since impugned the efficacy of MIS because of the reportedly inferior disease-free survival and overall survival outcomes compared to open surgery. However, additional studies have documented equivalent outcomes among the various surgical modalities, suggesting further exploration of clinical factors as we endeavor to conclusively determine the standard of care for patients diagnosed with ESCC.

Comparison of the survival outcomes of laparoscopic, abdominal and gasless laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: trial protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (LAGCC trial)

Background

Radical hysterectomy (RH) is considered a cornerstone in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. However, the debate surrounding the optimal surgical approach, whether minimally invasive or open surgery, remains controversial. The objective of this trial is to evaluate the survival outcomes of cervical cancer patients who undergo different surgical approaches.

Methods

This study is designed as a prospective, multicenter, open, parallel, and randomized controlled trial. A total of 500 patients diagnosed with stage IA1 with LVSI, IA2, IB1, or IB2 (2018 FIGO) will be recruited. Recruitment of participants started in November 2020. The participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: conventional laparoscopic RH, gasless laparoscopic RH, or abdominal RH. The primary endpoint of this trial is the 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate. The secondary endpoints will include the 2-year overall survival (OS) rate, 5-year DFS/OS, recurrence rates, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, surgery-related complications, and impact on quality of life (QoL).

Discussion

We expect this trial to provide compelling and high-quality evidence to guide the selection of the most appropriate surgical approach for early-stage cervical cancer.

Clinical trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Register, identifier ChiCTR2000035515.

MILACC study: could undetected lymph node micrometastases have impacted recurrence rate in the LACC trial?

OBJECTIVE

The etiology of inferior oncologic outcomes associated with minimally invasive surgery for early-stage cervical cancer remains unknown. Manipulation of lymph nodes with previously unrecognized low-volume disease might explain this finding. We re-analyzed lymph nodes by pathologic ultrastaging in node-negative patients who recurred in the LACC (Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer) trial.

METHODS

Included patients were drawn from the LACC trial database, had negative lymph nodes on routine pathologic evaluation, and recurred to the abdomen and/or pelvis. Patients without recurrence or without available lymph node tissue were excluded. Paraffin tissue blocks and slides from all lymph nodes removed by lymphadenectomy were re-analyzed per standard ultrastaging protocol aimed at the detection of micrometastases (>0.2 mm and ≤2 mm) and isolated tumor cells (clusters up to 0.2 mm or <200 cells).

RESULTS

The study included 20 patients with median age of 42 (range 30-68) years. Most patients were randomized to minimally invasive surgery (90%), had squamous cell carcinoma (65%), FIGO 2009 stage 1B1 (95%), grade 2 (60%) disease, had no adjuvant treatment (75%), and had a single site of recurrence (55%), most commonly at the vaginal cuff (45%). Only one patient had pelvic sidewall recurrence in the absence of other disease sites. The median number of lymph nodes analyzed per patient was 18.5 (range 4-32) for a total of 412 lymph nodes. A total of 621 series and 1242 slides were reviewed centrally by the ultrastaging protocol. No metastatic disease of any size was found in any lymph node.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no lymph node low-volume metastases among patients with initially negative lymph nodes who recurred in the LACC trial. Therefore, it is unlikely that manipulation of lymph nodes containing clinically undetected metastases is the underlying cause of the higher local recurrence risk in the minimally invasive arm of the LACC trial.

Evaluation of survival outcomes between minimally invasive and open surgery in the treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer: a population-based study in Osaka Japan

OBJECTIVE

To compare the oncological outcomes between Japanese women who underwent minimally invasive surgery and those who underwent open surgery for early-stage endometrial cancer.

METHODS

This population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the Osaka Cancer Registry from 2011 to 2018. Surgically treated patients for localized (uterine-confined) endometrial cancer were identified. Patients were classified into two groups according to the type of surgery (minimally invasive surgery group and open-surgery group), pathological risk factors (low-risk and high-risk), and year of diagnosis (Group 1, 2011-14; Group 2, 2015-18). Overall survival was compared between the minimally invasive surgery and open-surgery groups.

RESULTS

In the analyses including all patients, there was no difference in overall survival between the minimally invasive surgery and open-surgery groups (P = 0.0797). The 4-year overall survival rate was 97.1 and 95.7% in the minimally invasive surgery and open-surgery groups, respectively. When investigated according to pathological risks, there were no differences in overall survival between the minimally invasive surgery and open-surgery groups in both the low- and high-risk groups. In the low-risk group, the 4-year overall survival rates in the minimally invasive surgery and open-surgery groups were 97.7 and 96.5%, respectively. In the high-risk group, the 4-year overall survival rates in the minimally invasive surgery and open-surgery groups were 91.2 and 93.2%, respectively. Similarly, there were no differences in overall survival between the minimally invasive surgery and open-surgery groups in both Group 1 (P = 0.4479 in low-risk and P = 0.1826 in high-risk groups) and Group 2 (P = 0.1750 in low-risk and P = 0.0799 in high-risk groups).

CONCLUSION

Our study provides epidemiological evidence that minimally invasive surgery is an effective alternative to open surgery in Japanese patients with early-stage endometrial cancer.

Effect of preoperative cervical conization before hysterectomy on survival and recurrence of patients with cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Conization plays a therapeutic and diagnostic role in cervical cancer. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with cervical cancer who underwent hysterectomy with versus without preoperative cervical conization.

METHODS

In this meta-analysis, we analyzed studies published in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and Clinical Trials. gov that appeared in our search from inception to May 1, 2022.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with 4184 participants were included in this review. There were 2122 patients in the preoperative conization group and 2062 patients in the non-conization group. The meta-analysis showed that disease free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.12-0.44; 1616 participants; P = 0.030) and overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.33-0.86; 1835 participants; P = 0.597) were improved in the preoperative conization group compared with those in the non-conization group. The risk for recurrence was lower in the preoperative conization group than in the non-conization group (odds ratio [OR]: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.17-0.48; 1099 participants; P = 0.434). There was no significant statistical difference regarding intraoperative adverse events (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.18-3.70; 530 participants; P = 0.555) and postoperative adverse events (OR: 1.24; 95% CI: 0.54-2.85; 530 participants; P = 0.170) between the preoperative conization group and non-conization group. In subgroup analysis, patients who benefited more from preoperative conization, had underwent minimally invasive surgery, had smaller local tumor lesions, and had no lymph node involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative conization before radical hysterectomy may have a protective effect in the treatment of early cervical cancer, with better survival and less recurrence, especially when the patient is at an early stage and undergoes minimally invasive surgery.

Comparison of the Survival Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgery with Open Surgery in Patients with Uterine-Confined and Node-Negative Cervical Cancer: A Population-Based Study

We aimed to compare the oncological outcomes between Japanese women with uterine-confined and node-negative cervical cancer who underwent open surgery and those who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS). A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the Osaka Cancer Registry that ranged from 2011 to 2018. A total of 2279 patients who underwent surgical treatment for uterine-confined and node-negative cervical cancer were identified. The patients were classified into groups according to surgery type (open and MIS groups) and year of diagnosis (group one, 2011-2014; group two, 2015-2018). The oncologic outcomes were compared between the MIS and open groups. When the MIS group (n = 225) was compared with open group (n = 2054), overall, there was no significant between-group difference in terms of overall survival. Based on Kaplan-Meier estimates, the probability of overall survival at four years was 99.5% in the MIS group and 97.2% in the open group (p = 0.1110). When examined according to the year of diagnosis, there were no significant between-group differences in the overall survival in both groups one and two. In this population-based cohort study, MIS did not compromise survival outcomes when compared with conventional open surgery in Japanese patients with uterine-confined and node-negative (FIGO 2018 stage I) cervical cancer.

ALDH1: A potential therapeutic target for cancer stem cells in solid tumors

Solid tumors can be divided into benign solid tumors and solid malignant tumors in the academic community, among which malignant solid tumors are called cancers. Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the world, and the global incidence of cancer is increasing yearly New cancer patients in China are always the first. After the concept of stem cells was introduced in the tumor community, the CSC markers represented by ALDH1 have been widely studied due to their strong CSC cell characteristics and potential to be the driving force of tumor metastasis. In the research results in the past five years, it has been found that ALDH1 is highly expressed in various solid cancers such as breast cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer, liver cancer, gastric cancer, cervical cancer, esophageal cancer, ovarian cancer, head,and neck cancer. ALDH1 can activate and transform various pathways (such as the USP28/MYC signaling pathway, ALDH1A1/HIF-1α/VEGF axis, wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway), as well as change the intracellular pH value to promote formation and maintenance, resulting in drug resistance in tumors. By targeting and inhibiting ALDH1 in tumor stem cells, it can enhance the sensitivity of drugs and inhibit the proliferation, differentiation, and metastasis of solid tumor stem cells to some extent. This review discusses the relationship and pathway of ALDH1 with various solid tumors. It proposes that ALDH1 may serve as a diagnosis and therapeutic target for CSC, providing new insights and new strategies for reliable tumor treatment.

New Insights on the Minimal-Invasive Therapy of Cervical Cancer

Objective: The ideal management of early-stage cervical cancer has become the subject of a global controversy following the publication of a prospective study in 2018 that reported a worse oncologic outcome when comparing the minimally invasive approach to the laparotomy approach. The discussion involves both prospective and retrospective data and general and theoretical considerations. We wanted to look at the data available today and review the different opinions, offering an impartial assessment of the ongoing controversy. Methods: The available literature was reviewed, focusing on articles arguing for and against minimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer. We tried to avoid any fundamental bias, as is often evident in the available reviews on the subject. Literature both before and after the 2018 publication was taken into consideration. Results: As is usual in discussions of concepts, the literature that is now available provides arguments for both sides of this challenging issue, depending on one’s standpoint. Science-related writing is not immune to trends. There is a curious shift in opinion seen before and after 2018. One must question whether there was a prejudice in favor of minimally invasive surgery prior to the publication of the NEJM articles and a bias against it afterward. Conclusion: Whether further minimally invasive surgery for cervical cancer is invariable is tied to the more pressing question of how this surgery will have to be centralized in the future. Unless these questions are linked, no satisfactory solution can be found.