Search

Objective: To assess the ovarian cancer (OC) risk following endometrial cancer (EC) in patients who underwent ovarian preservation as part of the EC staging. Study Design: With permission of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program of the United States National Cancer Institute, clinicopathological information of women diagnosed with EC and following OC were analyzed. Incidence of OC and survival according to the surgical approach were studied. Primary analysis was conducted in women up to and including the age of 49 years. Results: A total of 116 patients up to the age of 49 years were diagnosed with EC and following OC. In this group of patients, no differences in incidence (IRR 0.9, CI 0.56–1.49, p = 0.66) or survival rates (p = 0.71) were found comparing ovarian preservation and bilateral salpingo‐oophorectomy (BSO) performance. In an overall analysis of women diagnosed with EC and following OC at any age, incidence of OC did not differ between groups (IRR 1.07, CI 0.83–1.39, p = 0.59) yet when including patients older than 49 years old survival rates were shorter in ovarian preservation patients compared to patients with BSO performed as part of their EC treatment. Conclusion: Ovarian preservation in EC patients under the age of 49 years may be considered safe, with no impact on OC incidence or survival, benefiting longer natural hormonal status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 outbreak caused persons to be reluctant to seek medical care due to fear of contracting the infection. To evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on admission rates to the delivery room and the feto-maternal unit, and to assess the effect on the nature of presenting obstetrical complaints to the emergency department. A retrospective cohort study in one medical center. The population was women > 20 weeks pregnant who presented to the obstetrical emergency department with self-complaints during 29 days at the peak of the pandemic outbreak, and a matched group during the exact period in the previous year. We compared between the groups: clinical, obstetrical, and demographic data, including age, area of residence, gravidity, parity, previous cesarean deliveries, high-risk pregnancy follow-up, the last 30 days admissions to the obstetrical emergency department, gestational age, chief complaints, cervical dilatation, cervical effacement, admissions to the delivery room or feto-maternal unit, time from admissions to the delivery room to birth, if applicable, and acute obstetrical complications diagnosed at the emergency department. During the pandemic outbreak, 398 women met study inclusion criteria, compared to 544 women in the matched period of the previous year. During the COVID-19 period, women visited the obstetrical emergency department at a more advanced mean gestational age (37.6 ± 3.7 vs. 36.7 ± 4.6, p =.001). Higher proportions of women in the COVID-19 cohort presented in active labor, defined by cervical dilation of at least 5 cm on admission to the labor ward [37 (9.3%) vs 28 (5.1%), p =.013)] and with premature rupture of membranes [82 (20.6%) vs 60 (11.0%), p <.001)], and consequently with more admissions to the delivery room [198 (49.7%) vs 189 (34.7%), p <.001)]. We also recorded a significant increase in urgent obstetrical events in the emergency department during the recorded COVID-19 pandemic [23 (5.8%) vs 12 (2.2%)), p =.004]. However, the rates of neonatal and maternal morbidity did not change. During the outbreak the proportion of visits during the night was higher than during the matched period of the previous year: [138 (34.7%) vs 145 (26.6%)), p =.008]. In a multivariate logistic regression, the higher rates of admission to the delivery room during active labor and of urgent events during the pandemic outbreak compared to the matched period in the previous year remained statistically significant. The pandemic outbreak of COVID-19 caused a behavioral change among women who presented to the obstetrical emergency department. This was characterized by delayed arrival to the obstetrical emergency department and the delivery room, which led to a significant increase in urgent and acute interventions. The change in behavior did not affect the rates of maternal and neonatal morbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Methods Results Conclusion The aim of this study was to assess the usefulness of routine hemoglobin testing following elective and urgent cesarean section (CS) in patients without primary postpartum hemorrhage (PPH).This retrospective cohort study included women who underwent vaginal delivery (VD), elective CS, and urgent CS at Carmel Medical Center from 2015 to 2020. Data were extracted from the obstetric database, excluding deliveries with PPH. Demographic and obstetric variables were recorded. Primary outcomes were the need for packed red blood cell transfusion.A total of 19 446 women were included, with five (0.3%) requiring a blood transfusion in the elective CS group, 27 (0.17%) in the VD group, and eight (0.4%) in the urgent CS group. Urgent CS was associated with a higher risk of blood transfusion, but there was no significant difference between elective CS and VD. Elective CS showed the lowest rates of post‐delivery hemoglobin below 7 g/dL 1 (0.1%) compared to VD 16 (0.6%) and urgent CS 13 (0.7%).Routine postoperative hemoglobin testing following elective CS in asymptomatic patients without PPH appears unnecessary. This study supports reconsidering routine hemoglobin testing following elective CS, aligning with the goal of optimizing resource utilization while maintaining patient quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Endometrial carcinosarcoma is a rare and aggressive high-grade endometrial carcinoma with secondary sarcomatous trans-differentiation (conversion theory). The clinical presentation and diagnostic work-up roughly align with those of the more common endometrioid counterpart, although endometrial carcinosarcoma is more frequently diagnosed at an advanced stage. Endometrial carcinosarcoma is not a single entity but encompasses different histological subtypes, depending on the type of carcinomatous and sarcomatous elements. The majority of endometrial carcinosarcomas are characterized by p53 abnormalities. The proportion of POLE and microsatellite instablity-high (MSI-H) is directly related to the epithelial component, being approximately 25% and 3% in endometrioid and non-endometrioid components.The management of non-metastatic disease is based on a multimodal approach with optimal surgery followed by (concomitant or sequential) chemotherapy and radiotherapy, even for early stages. Palliative chemotherapy is recommended in the metastatic or recurrent setting, with carboplatin/paclitaxel doublet being the first-line regimen. Although the introduction of immunotherapy plus/minus a tyrosine kinase inhibitor shifted the paradigm of treatment of patients with recurrent endometrial cancer, patients with endometrial carcinosarcoma were excluded from most studies evaluating single-agent immunotherapy or the combination. However, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) approved the use of pembrolizumab and lenvatinib in endometrial cancer (all histotypes) after progression on chemotherapy and single-agent immunotherapy in MSI-H cancers. In the era of precision medicine, emerging knowledge on molecular endometrial carcinosarcoma is opening new promising therapeutic options for more personalized treatment. The present review outlines state-of-the-art knowledge and future directions for patients with endometrial carcinosarcoma., Competing Interests: Competing interests: GB: Novartis AG Pharma (C/A, H), Italian Ministry of Health (RG); NC: AstraZeneca (C/A, SH), Seattle Genetics (C/A, SH), MSD (SAB), Mersana (C/A, SH), eTheRNA immunotherapies NV (C/A, SH), Roche (travel expenses), Genmab (travel expenses), Amgen (travel expenses). IR-C: honoraria from AstraZeneca, Clovis, GSK/Tesaro, and PharmaMar; consulting/advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Roche, Clovis, GSK/Tesaro, Genmab, PharmaMar, MSD, Mersana, Deciphera, OncXea, Esai, BMS, Novartis, and Pfizer; research funding from MSD; travel expenses from AstraZeneca, GSK, and Roche. YS: AstraZeneca (CA), GSK (CA). PW: Amgen (SH, RF, SAB), AstraZeneca (SH, RF, H, SAB), Clovis (SH, RF, SAB), Eisai (SH, SAB), GSK (SH, SAB), Lilly (SH, SAB), MSD (SH, RF, SAB), Novartis (SH, RF, SAB), Pfizer (SH, RF, SAB), Roche (SH, RF, H, SAB), TEVA (SH, SAB). NYLN: AstraZeneca (SH), Janssen (SH). KT: AstraZeneca (SH), Chugai (SH, RF), Eisai (SH), MSD (SH), Mochida (SH), Takeda (SH). TE: Takeda (SH), Astra Zeneca (SH), Eisai (SH), Chugai Pharma (SH, RF), MSD (SH), Mochida (SH). DL: AstraZeneca (H, CA), Clovis (H, CA, RF), GSK/Tesaro (H, CA), Roche (CA), Genmab (CA), PharmaMar (CA, RF), MSD (CA, RF), Esai (CA), Merck Serono (CA), Novartis (CA), and PharmaMar (H); consulting/advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Roche, Clovis, GSK/Tesaro. DMP: AstraZeneca (CA, SH, SAB), GSK (CA, SH, SAB). NRA-R: NIH/NCI Cancer Center support grant P30 CA008748 (F). HD: Roche (CA, SH, SAB), Pfizer (CA, SH, SAB), AstraZeneca (SH, SAB), Lily (SAB), GSK (SAB), Novartis (SH), Pharmamar (SH); BJM: AstraZeneca (SH, SAB), GSK (SH, SAB), Incyte (SAB), Merck (SH, SAB), Roche/Genentech (SH, SAB), Eisai (SAB), GOG-Foundation (E), US Oncology (E)., (© IGCS and ESGO 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Gestational trophoblastic disease comprises a spectrum of pregnancy-related disorders, consists of premalignant disorders of complete and partial hydatidiform mole, and malignant disorders such as invasive mole, choriocarcinoma, and the rare placental-site trophoblastic tumor/epithelioid trophoblastic tumor. These malignant forms are termed Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia (GTN). Until the early 1960's, hysterectomy was the treatment of choice for women with malignant trophoblastic diseases. The five-year survival rate was 40% for local disease, and around 20% in women with metastases. Chemotherapy, treatment according to the various risk factors and the use of β-hCG values as a marker for monitoring the disease, resulted in a cure rate exceeding 98%, while preserving patient's fertility. Due to its` extremely low incidence with relatively complex treatment protocols, in the presence of high potential for side effects, in most countries there are tertiary centers that coordinate the treatment and follow-up of these diseases. In this review, we will summarize strategies for the primary management of gestational trophoblastic disease, the evaluation and management of malignant gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN) and surveillance after treatment.

Objectives: To investigate the perspectives and attitudes of gynecologists towards risk reduction bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO) in average-risk women at the time of hysterectomy procedure for benign indications divided by age groups, and whether they recommend the use of hormonal therapy post oophorectomy., Methods: A questionnaire was distributed during staff meetings either by a printed questionnaire or by a link to a total number of 360 gynecologists include seniors and practitioners. Three hundred and one gynecologists participated in a national survey. Participants completed a structured questionnaire including three different scenarios. The subject group included both attending (senior) and second-year and above resident gynecologists, from divergent subspecialties. The demographic information of the survey responders included sex, age, years of experience, working domain, and subspecialty., Results: There was a 95% consensus rate among Israeli gynecologists, in favor of the ovarian conservation approach among 45-year-old women, elected for hysterectomy due to benign indications. Whereas in 50-year-old perimenopause women, without any evident family history of ovarian cancer, 39% of gynecologists advocated BSO at the time of hysterectomy, for benign indications. As for 46-year-old women, with a first-degree relative diagnosed with ovarian cancer at the age of 65 years old, 70.4% voted for prophylactic BSO. For the second part of the questionnaire regarding the utilization of hormone therapy (HT) after BSO, 66.1% of our responders proclaimed they would always encourage the use of HT in 45-year-old-women, while 52.8% recommended HT in 46-year-old-women with a family history of ovarian cancer and 39.5% for 50-year-old perimenopause women., Conclusion: Our national survey confirms the wide variability in attitudes among gynecologists towards performing RRBSO at hysterectomy for a benign indication in women aged 45-50, with family history being a major factor in the decision., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)