1
|
Algera M, van Driel W, Slangen B, Kruitwagen R, Wouters M, Ten Cate A, Aalders A, van der Kolk A, Kruse A, Jong AVHD, van de Swaluw A, Visschers B, Buis C, Gerestein C, Smeets C, Boll D, van de Laar R, Ngo D, Davelaar E, Ooms E, van Dorst E, Schmeink C, van Es E, Roes E, Ten Cate F, Rijcken F, Dunné FRV, Fons G, Jansen G, Verhoeve H, Nagel H, Keizer H, Smedts H, Ebisch I, van de Lande J, Louwers J, Briet J, De Waard J, Diepstraten J, Vollebergh J, Van der Avoort I, Van Dijk J, Lange J, Mens J, Gaarenstroom K, Overmars K, De Vries L, Hofman L, Bartelink L, Huisman M, Verbruggen M, Vos M, Huisman M, Kleppe M, van den Hende M, van der Aa M, Wust M, Baas M, Engelen M, Scheers E, Moonen-Delarue M, Tjiong M, Leffers N, Reesink N, Timmers P, Kolk P, Vencken P, Yigit R, Smit R, Westenberg S, Coppus S, Stam T, Schukken T, van Baal W, Minderhoud-Bassie W, Van der Plas-Koning Y, van Ham M. Impact of the COVID-19-pandemic on patients with gynecological malignancies undergoing surgery: A Dutch population-based study using data from the 'Dutch Gynecological Oncology Audit'. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 165:330-338. [PMID: 35221132 PMCID: PMC8860632 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.02.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2021] [Revised: 02/13/2022] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The COVID-19-pandemic caused drastic healthcare changes worldwide. To date, the impact of these changes on gynecological cancer healthcare is relatively unknown. This study aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19-pandemic on surgical gynecological-oncology healthcare. METHODS This population-based cohort study included all surgical procedures with curative intent for gynecological malignancies, registered in the Dutch Gynecological Oncology Audit, in 2018-2020. Four periods were identified based on COVID-19 hospital admission rates: 'Pre-COVID-19', 'First wave', 'Interim period', and 'Second wave'. Surgical volume, perioperative care processes, and postoperative outcomes from 2020 were compared with 2018-2019. RESULTS A total of 11,488 surgical procedures were analyzed. For cervical cancer, surgical volume decreased by 17.2% in 2020 compared to 2018-2019 (mean 2018-2019: n = 542.5, 2020: n = 449). At nadir (interim period), only 51% of the expected cervical cancer procedures were performed. For ovarian, vulvar, and endometrial cancer, volumes remained stable. Patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer more frequently received neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 2020 compared to 2018-2019 (67.7% (n = 432) vs. 61.8% (n = 783), p = 0.011). Median time to first treatment was significantly shorter in all four malignancies in 2020. For vulvar and endometrial cancer, the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in 2020. No significant differences in complicated course and 30-day-mortality were observed. CONCLUSIONS The COVID-19-pandemic impacted surgical gynecological-oncology healthcare: in 2020, surgical volume for cervical cancer dropped considerably, waiting time was significantly shorter for all malignancies, while neoadjuvant chemotherapy administration for advanced-stage ovarian cancer increased. The safety of perioperative healthcare was not negatively impacted by the pandemic, as complications and 30-day-mortality remained stable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M.D. Algera
- Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht, the Netherlands,GROW- School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands,Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA), Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands,Corresponding author at: Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Rijnsburgerweg 10, 2333 AA Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - W.J. van Driel
- Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Department of Gynecology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - B.F.M. Slangen
- Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht, the Netherlands,GROW- School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - R.F.P.M. Kruitwagen
- Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht, the Netherlands,GROW- School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - M.W.J.M. Wouters
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA), Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands,Netherlands Cancer Institute, Department of Surgical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands,Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - the participants of the Dutch Gynecological Oncology Collaborator groupBaalbergenA.1Ten CateA.D.2AaldersA.L.3van der KolkA.4KruseA.J.5JongA.M.L.D. Van Haaften-de6van de SwaluwA.M.G.7VisschersB.A.J.T.8BuisC.C.N.9GeresteinC.G.1017SmeetsC.M.W.H.11BollD.12van de LaarR.13NgoD.H.14DavelaarE.15OomsE.A.16van DorstE.B.L.17SchmeinkC.E.18van EsE.J.M.19RoesE.M.20Ten CateF.A.21RijckenF.E.M.22DunnéF.M.R. Rosier-van23FonsG.24JansenG.H.25VerhoeveH.R.26NagelH.T.C.27KeizerH.H.28SmedtsH.P.M.29EbischI.M.W.30van de LandeJ.2LouwersJ.A.31BrietJ.32De WaardJ.33DiepstratenJ.4VolleberghJ.H.A.34Van der AvoortI.A.M.35Van DijkJ.E.W.36LangeJ.G.37MensJ.W.M.20GaarenstroomK.N.69OvermarsK.38De VriesL.C.39HofmanL.N.40BartelinkL.R.41HuismanM.A.42VerbruggenM.B.43VosM.C.44HuismanM.45KleppeM.46van den HendeM.47van der AaM.48WustM.D.49BaasM.I.50EngelenM.J.A.51ScheersE.C.A.H.52Moonen-DelarueM.W.G.53TjiongM.Y.54LeffersN.55ReesinkN.56TimmersP.J.57KolkP.58VenckenP.M.L.H.59YigitR.60SmitR.A.61WestenbergS.M.62CoppusS.F.P.J.63StamT.C.27SchukkenT.K.64van BaalW.M.65Minderhoud-BassieW.66Van der Plas-KoningY.W.C.M.67van HamM.A.P..C.68Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft, the NetherlandsSpaarne Gasthuis, Haarlem, the NetherlandsRijnstate Ziekenhuis, Arnhem, the NetherlandsStichting Olijf, the NetherlandsIsala Klinieken, Zwolle, the NetherlandsHagaZiekenhuis, The Hague, the NetherlandsDijklander Ziekenhuis, Hoorn, the NetherlandsStichting Zorgsaam Zeeuws Vlaanderen, Terneuzen, the NetherlandsNij Smellinghe, Drachten, the NetherlandsMeander Medisch Centrum, Amersfoort, the NetherlandsSlingeland Ziekenhuis, Doetinchem, the NetherlandsCatharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsVieCuri Medisch Centrum, Venlo, the NetherlandsElkerliek Ziekenhuis, Helmond, the NetherlandsLangeland Ziekenhuis, Zoetermeer, the NetherlandsRode Kruis Ziekenhuis, Beverwijk, the NetherlandsUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the NetherlandsSint Anna Ziekenhuis, Geldrop, the NetherlandsSint Jansgasthuis, Weert, the NetherlandsErasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsBovenij Ziekenhuis, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsAlrijne Zorggroep, Leiderdorp, the NetherlandsTer Gooi Ziekenhuis, Hilversum, the NetherlandsAcademic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsTjongerschans Ziekenhuis, Heereveen, the NetherlandsOnze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsHaaglanden Medical Center, the Hague, the NetherlandsMedisch Centrum Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, the NetherlandsAmphia Ziekenhuis, Breda, the NetherlandsCanisius Wilhelmina ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, the NetherlandsDiakonessenhuis, Utrecht, the NetherlandsZiekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, the NetherlandsFranciscus Gasthuis & Vlietland, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsBernhoven Ziekenhuis, Uden, the NetherlandsIkazia Ziekenhuis, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsStreekziekenhuis Koningin Beatrix, Winterswijk, the NetherlandsSint Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwengein, the NetherlandsAmstelland Ziekenhuis, Amstelveen, the NetherlandsTreant Zorggroep, Hoogeveen, the NetherlandsAlbert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis, Dordrecht, the NetherlandsGelderse Vallei, Ede, the NetherlandsDeventer Ziekenhuis, Deventer, the NetherlandsZaans Medisch Centrum, Zaandam, the NetherlandsElisabeth- TweeSteden Ziekenhuis, Tilburg, the NetherlandsGelre Ziekenhuis, Apeldoorn, the NetherlandsMartini Ziekenhuis, Groningen, the NetherlandsIJsselland Ziekenhuis, Capelle aan de IJssel, the NetherlandsNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (NCCN), the NetherlandsSaxenburgh Medisch Centrum, Hardenberg, the NetherlandsZiekenhuis Rivierenland, Tiel, the NetherlandsZuyderland Medisch Centrum, Heerlen, the NetherlandsWilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Assen, the NetherlandsLaurentius Ziekenhuis, Roermond, the NetherlandsVrije Universiteit Medisch Centrum, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsOmmelander Ziekenhuis, Scheemda, the NetherlandsMedisch Centrum Twente, Enschede, the NetherlandsMaasstad Ziekenhuis, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsGroene Hart Ziekenhuis, Gouda, the NetherlandsBravis Ziekenhuis, Roosendaal, the NetherlandsUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the NetherlandsJeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, the NetherlandsNoordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, Alkmaar, the NetherlandsMaxima Medisch Centrum, Veldhoven, the NetherlandsAntonius Ziekenhuis, Sneek, the NetherlandsFlevoziekenhuis, Almere, the NetherlandsSint Jansdal Ziekenhuis, Harderwijk, the NetherlandsAdmiraal de Ruyter Ziekenhuis, Vlissingen, the NetherlandsRadboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the NetherlandsLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lof P, Retèl V, Algera M, van Gent M, Gaarenstroom K, van Driel W. Clinical implementation of routine diagnostic laparoscopy to guide initial treatment in patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer in Dutch clinical practice: Evaluation of support and a budget impact analysis. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 165:459-465. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.03.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2022] [Revised: 03/28/2022] [Accepted: 03/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
3
|
Pouwer A, Hinten F, van der Velden J, Smolders R, Slangen B, Zijlmans H, IntHout J, van der Zee A, Boll D, Gaarenstroom K, Arts H, de Hullu J. Volume-controlled versus short drainage after inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy in vulvar cancer patients: A Dutch nationwide prospective study. Gynecol Oncol 2017; 146:580-587. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.06.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2017] [Revised: 06/26/2017] [Accepted: 06/27/2017] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
4
|
te Grootenhuis N, van der Zee A, van Doorn H, van der Velden J, Vergote I, Zanagnolo V, Baldwin P, Gaarenstroom K, van Dorst E, Trum J, Slangen B, Runnebaum I, Tamussino K, Hermans R, Provencher D, de Bock G, de Hullu J, Oonk M. Sentinel nodes in vulvar cancer: Long-term follow-up of the GROningen INternational Study on Sentinel nodes in Vulvar cancer (GROINSS-V) I. Gynecol Oncol 2016; 140:8-14. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.09.077] [Citation(s) in RCA: 177] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2015] [Revised: 09/21/2015] [Accepted: 09/26/2015] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
5
|
Vreeswijk M, Meijers M, Naipal K, Verkaik N, Kanaar R, Hoeijmakers J, Jager A, van Gent D, Gaarenstroom K, Smit V, Vrieling H. Abstract 3392: Ex vivo analysis of RAD51 foci induction in fresh tumor tissue: a promising new tool for the identification of homologous recombination-deficient tumors. Cancer Res 2015. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.am2015-3392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose. BRCA1 and BRCA2 related breast and ovarian tumors respond very well to treatment with PARP inhibitors (PARPi) because of their deficiency in homologous recombination (HR). We have indications that a substantial number of ovarian tumors might have deficiencies in HR unrelated to germline mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2. A functional assay to assess HR efficacy might therefore allow identification of additional ovarian cancer patients that could benefit from PARPi treatment.
Experimental procedure. Unselected fresh ovarian tumor samples were collected from patients undergoing surgery or ascites/pleural fluid drainage. Samples were irradiated with ionizing radiation ex vivo, fixed after 2 hours and embedded in paraffin. Sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin and examined by pathologist. The presence of RAD51 foci in replicating cells as visualized by immunofluorescence was used as a functional read out for HR proficiency.
Results. We determined the ability to induce RAD51 foci following radiation in ex vivo cultured ovarian tumor samples that contained sufficient numbers of replicating cells (n = 13). RAD51 foci formation was absent (<20% replicating cells showed RAD51 foci) in 46% of the samples. In one tumor sample that did not form RAD51 foci in replicating cells upon ionizing radiation, a pathogenic mutation in BRCA1 was identified (c.5277+1G>A). Genetic and epigenetic analyses of the other samples are ongoing.
Conclusion. The ex vivo analysis of RAD51 foci induction in fresh tumor tissue is a promising new tool to identify HR deficient tumors. Not only is it an important time saving strategy compared to BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation analysis, it may also identify a much broader patient population that will be eligible for the treatment with PARP inhibitors.
Citation Format: Maaike Vreeswijk, M. Meijers, K.A.T. Naipal, N.S. Verkaik, R. Kanaar, J.H.J. Hoeijmakers, A. Jager, D.C. van Gent, K.N. Gaarenstroom, V.T.H.B.M. Smit, H. Vrieling. Ex vivo analysis of RAD51 foci induction in fresh tumor tissue: a promising new tool for the identification of homologous recombination-deficient tumors. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr 3392. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-3392
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - M. Meijers
- 1Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - K.A.T. Naipal
- 2Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - N.S. Verkaik
- 2Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - R. Kanaar
- 2Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - A. Jager
- 2Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - D.C. van Gent
- 2Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | | | - H. Vrieling
- 1Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Schaafsma B, van der Vorst J, Verbeek F, Peters A, de Kroon C, Trimbos J, Gaarenstroom K, Frangioni J, van de Velde C, Vahrmeijer A. 90. Randomized comparison of near-infrared fluorescence lymphatic tracers for sentinel lymph node mapping of cervical cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2012. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2012.06.090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
|
7
|
Gaarenstroom K, Melkert P, Walboomers J, Van Den Brule A, Van Bommel P, Meyer C, Voorhorst F, Kenemans P, Helmerhorst T. Human papillomavirus DNA and genotypes: prognostic factors for progression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1994; 4:73-78. [PMID: 11578388 DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1438.1994.04020073.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
A retrospective study of 227 patients presenting with abnormal cervical cytology was conducted to investigate the relationship between human papillomavirus (HPV) and progression of untreated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) lesions. All patients had colposcopically directed biopsies for histologic diagnosis. The patients were followed cytologically and colposcopically for a mean of 19 months (range 6-42 months). Progression of a cervical lesion was defined as progression to a higher CIN grade confirmed histologically by directed biopsy. HPV DNA detection was done on material remaining from the cervical swabs by the general primer polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and type-specific PCR method, which made the detection of HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33 and not yet sequenced DNA types (X) possible. The presence of HPV DNA increased with the severity of the lesion (P < 0.001). In CIN III, a 100% HPV DNA prevalence was found, with HPV type 16 being the most prevalent type in 75%. Progression was significantly related to the presence of HPV DNA, in particular HPV type 16. The percentage of progressive disease was 21% in the case of HPV DNA positive lesions (n = 130) and 29% in the presence of HPV type 16, whereas HPV DNA negative lesions (n = 97) showed no progression. The detection of HPV DNA and HPV genotype can be used to identify patients with high-risk cervical lesions, since the presence of HPV DNA and genotype 16 in particular are closely related to CIN progression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K.N. Gaarenstroom
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Department of Pathology, Free University Hospital, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, and Department of Gynecologic Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|