Search

Objective: To analyze contemporary U.S. use of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of endometrial cancer and associated inpatient complications and costs.Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, the National Inpatient Sample database was analyzed in patients with nonmetastatic endometrial cancer who underwent hysterectomy during 2012-2013. Hierarchical multiple logistic regression and propensity score matching were used to compare complications among patients treated with open compared with minimally invasive hysterectomy surgery. Cost of care was also compared using generalized linear modeling.Results: We identified 9,799 patients; 52.4% underwent open and 47.6% minimally invasive hysterectomy. Many patients (43.4%) were treated at low-volume hospitals (less than 10 endometrial cancer cases annually). Patients were less likely to undergo open surgery in high-volume compared with low-volume hospitals (51.8% compared with 58.1%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.94) and more likely to undergo open surgery in rural compared with urban teaching hospitals (75.6% compared with 51.1%, respectively; adjusted OR 14.34, 95% CI 9.66-21.27), government compared with nonprofit hospitals (61.3% compared with 51.1%, respectively; adjusted OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.15-2.39), and in patients of black (67.9%; OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.30-1.65) and "other" race (60.5%; adjusted OR 2.39, 95% CI 1.99-2.87) compared with white race (49.2%, referent). Open surgery was associated with increased perioperative complications (adjusted OR 2.80, 95% CI 2.48-3.17) and a $1,243 increase in cost per case compared with minimally invasive approaches (P<.001). Using minimally invasive surgery for 80% of study patients may have averted 2,733 complications and saved approximately $19 million.Conclusion: Most U.S. women with endometrial cancer continue to be treated with open hysterectomy surgery despite increased complication rates and financial costs associated with this approach. A disparity in endometrial cancer surgical care exists that is affected by patient race and hospital geography and cancer volumes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Whilst previous studies have reported that higher BMI increases a woman's risk of developing ovarian cancer, associations for the different histological subtypes have not been well defined. As the prevalence of obesity has increased dramatically, and classification of ovarian histology has improved in the last decade, we sought to examine the association in a pooled analysis of recent studies participating in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium. We evaluated the association between BMI (recent, maximum and in young adulthood) and ovarian cancer risk using original data from 15 case-control studies (13 548 cases and 17 913 controls). We combined study-specific adjusted odds ratios (ORs) using a random-effects model. We further examined the associations by histological subtype, menopausal status and post-menopausal hormone use. High BMI (all time-points) was associated with increased risk. This was most pronounced for borderline serous (recent BMI: pooled ORZ1.24 per 5 kg/m2; 95% CI 1.18-1.30), invasive endometrioid (1.17; 1.11-1.23) and invasive mucinous (1.19; 1.06-1.32) tumours. There was no association with serous invasive cancer overall (0.98; 0.94-1.02), but increased risks for low-grade serous invasive tumours (1.13, 1.03-1.25) and in pre-menopausal women (1.11; 1.04-1.18). Among post-menopausal women, the associations did not differ between hormone replacement therapy users and non-users. Whilst obesity appears to increase risk of the less common histological subtypes of ovarian cancer, it does not increase risk of high-grade invasive serous cancers, and reducing BMI is therefore unlikely to prevent the majority of ovarian cancer deaths. Other modifiable factors must be identified to control this disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT) of the National Cancer Institute is widely used for estimating absolute risk of invasive breast cancer. However, the absolute risk estimates for Asian and Pacific Islander American (APA) women are based on data from white women. We developed a model for projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk in APA women and compared its projections to those from BCRAT. Methods Data from 589 women with breast cancer (case patients) and 952 women without breast cancer (control subjects) in the Asian American Breast Cancer Study were used to compute relative and attributable risks based on the age at menarche, number of affected mothers, sisters, and daughters, and number of previous benign biopsies. Absolute risks were obtained by combining this information with ethnicity-specific data from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program and with US ethnicity-specific mortality data to create the Asian American Breast Cancer Study model (AABCS model). Independent data from APA women in the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) were used to check the calibration and discriminatory accuracy of the AABCS model. Results The AABCS model estimated absolute risk separately for Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Hawaiian, Other Pacific Islander, and Other Asian women. Relative and attributable risks for APA women were comparable to those in BCRAT, but the AABCS model usually estimated lower-risk projections than BCRAT in Chinese and Filipino, but not in Hawaiian women, and not in every age and ethnic subgroup. The AABCS model underestimated absolute risk by 17% (95% confidence interval = 1% to 38%) in independent data from WHI, but APA women in the WHI had incidence rates approximately 18% higher than those estimated from the SEER program. Conclusions The AABCS model was calibrated to ethnicity-specific incidence rates from the SEER program for projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk and is preferable to BCRAT for counseling APA women. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Overweight and obesity are strongly associated with endometrial cancer. Several independent genome-wide association studies recently identified two common polymorphisms, FTO rs9939609 and MC4R rs17782313, that are linked to increased body weight and obesity.We examined the association of FTO rs9939609 and MC4R rs17782313 with endometrial cancer risk in a pooled analysis of nine case-control studies within the Epidemiology of Endometrial Cancer Consortium (E2C2). This analysis included 3601 non-Hispanic white women with histologically-confirmed endometrial carcinoma and 5275 frequency-matched controls. Unconditional logistic regression models were used to assess the relation of FTO rs9939609 and MC4R rs17782313 genotypes to the risk of endometrial cancer. Among control women, both the FTO rs9939609 A and MC4R rs17782313 C alleles were associated with a 16% increased risk of being overweight (p = 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively). In case-control analyses, carriers of the FTO rs9939609 AA genotype were at increased risk of endometrial carcinoma compared to women with the TT genotype [odds ratio (OR) =1.17; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03-1.32, p =0.01]. However, this association was no longer apparent after adjusting for body mass index (BMI), suggesting mediation of the gene-disease effect through body weight. The MC4R rs17782313 polymorphism was not related to endometrial cancer risk (per allele OR =0.98; 95% CI: 0.91-1.06; p =0.68). FTO rs9939609 is a susceptibility marker for white non-Hispanic women at higher risk of endometrial cancer. Although FTO rs9939609 alone might have limited clinical or public health significance for identifying women at high risk for endometrial cancer beyond that of excess body weight, further investigation of obesity-related genetic markers might help to identify the pathways that influence endometrial carcinogenesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]