Search

Background: Evidence on the optimal follow-up schedule after endometrial cancer is lacking. The study aim was to compare satisfaction with care between women who received reduced follow-up care and women who received usual guideline-directed follow-up care for three years after surgery., Methods: The ENSURE (ENdometrial cancer SURvivors' follow-up carE) trial was a non-inferiority randomized controlled multicenter trial in 42 hospitals in the Netherlands. The intervention arm received reduced follow-up care (4 visits/3 years), while the control group received usual follow-up care (8-11 visits/3 years). Primary outcome was overall satisfaction with care, PSQIII score, over three years follow-up, with a non-inferiority margin of 6. Mixed linear regression, intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses (presented below) were used., Results: Among 316 women included, overall satisfaction with care was not lower in the reduced follow-up (mean 82; SD = 15) compared with the usual follow-up group (mean 80; SD = 15) group (B = 1.80(-2.09;5.68)). At 6, 12 and 36 months, more women (93/94/90%) in the reduced follow-up group were satisfied with their follow-up schedule than in the usual follow-up group (79/79/82%; p < 0.001; p < 0.001; p = 0.050)., Conclusions and Relevance: Women with low-risk, early-stage endometrial cancer who received reduced follow-up care were no less satisfied with their care than women receiving usual follow-up care. Compared with usual follow-up, women in the reduced follow-up group had fewer clinical visits and, at the same time, more often reported being satisfied with their follow-up schedule. Findings suggest that reduced follow-up care may be the new standard, but should be tailored to meet additional needs where indicated., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Authors have no conflict of interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: High cancer risks, as applicable to BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers, can induce significant cancer concerns. We examined the degree of cancer worry and the course of this worry among BRCA1/2-PV carriers undergoing surgery to prevent ovarian cancer, and identified factors associated with high cancer worry., Methods: Cancer worry was evaluated as part of the multicentre, prospective TUBA-study (NCT02321228) in which BRCA1/2-PV carriers choose either novel risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy or standard risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. The Cancer Worry Scale was obtained before and 3 and 12 months after surgery. Cancer worry patterns were analysed using latent class growth analysis and associated factors were identified with regression analysis., Results: Of all 577 BRCA1/2-PV carriers, 320 (57%) had high (≥ 14) cancer worry pre-surgery, and 54% had lower worry 12 months post-surgery than pre-surgery. Based on patterns over time, BRCA1/2-PV carriers could be classified into three groups: persistently low cancer worry (56%), persistently high cancer worry (6%), and fluctuating, mostly declining, cancer worry (37%). Factors associated with persistently high cancer concerns were age below 35 (BRCA1) or 40 (BRCA2), unemployment, previous breast cancer, lower education and a more recent BRCA1/2-PV diagnosis., Conclusions: Some degree of cancer worry is considered normal, and most BRCA1/2-PV carriers have declining cancer worry after gynaecological risk-reducing surgery. However, a subset of these BRCA1/2-PV carriers has persisting major cancer concerns up to 1 year after surgery. They should be identified and potentially offered additional support., Clinical Trial Registration: The TUBA-study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov since December 11th, 2014. Registration number: NCT02321228., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Laparoscopic hysterectomy is accepted worldwide as the standard treatment option for early-stage endometrial cancer. However, there are limited data on long-term survival, particularly when no lymphadenectomy is performed. We compared the survival outcomes of total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), both without lymphadenectomy, for early-stage endometrial cancer up to 5 years postoperatively., Methods: Follow-up of a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial comparing TLH and TAH, without routine lymphadenectomy, for women with stage I endometrial cancer. Enrolment was between 2007 and 2009 by 2:1 randomisation to TLH or TAH. Outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and primary site of recurrence. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were adjusted for age, stage, grade, and radiotherapy with adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) reported. To test for significance, non-inferiority margins were defined., Results: In total, 279 women underwent a surgical procedure, of whom 263 (94%) had follow-up data. For the TLH (n = 175) and TAH (n = 88) groups, DFS (90.3% vs 84.1%; aHR[recurrence], 0.69; 95%CI, 0.31-1.52), OS (89.2% vs 82.8%; aHR[death], 0.60; 95%CI, 0.30-1.19), and DSS (95.0% vs 89.8%; aHR[death], 0.62; 95%CI, 0.23-1.70) were reported at 5 years. At a 10% significance level, and with a non-inferiority margin of 0.20, the null hypothesis of inferiority was rejected for all three outcomes. There were no port-site or wound metastases, and local recurrence rates were comparable., Conclusion: Disease recurrence and 5-year survival rates were comparable between the TLH and TAH groups and comparable to studies with lymphadenectomy, supporting the widespread use of TLH without lymphadenectomy as the primary treatment for early-stage, low-grade endometrial cancer., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Risk-reducing surgery is advised to BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers around the age of 40 years to reduce ovarian cancer risk. In the TUBA-study, a multicenter preference study (NCT02321228), BRCA1/2-PV carriers are offered a choice: the standard strategy of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy or the novel strategy of risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy. We evaluated feasibility and effectiveness of a patient decision aid for this choice., Methods: Premenopausal BRCA1/2-PV carriers were counselled for risk-reducing surgical options in the TUBA-study; the first cohort was counselled without and the second cohort with decision aid. Evaluation was performed using digital questionnaires for participating women and their healthcare professionals. Outcome measures included actual choice, feasibility (usage and experiences) and effectiveness (knowledge, cancer worry, decisional conflict, decisional regret and self-estimated influence on decision)., Results: 283 women were counselled without and 282 women with decision aid. The novel strategy was chosen less frequently in women without compared with women with decision aid (67% vs 78%, p = 0.004). The decision aid was graded with an 8 out of 10 by both women and professionals, and 78% of the women would recommend this decision aid to others. Users of the decision aid reported increased knowledge about the options and increased insight in personal values. Knowledge on cancer risk, decisional conflict, decisional regret and cancer worry were similar in both cohorts., Conclusions: The use of the patient decision aid for risk-reducing surgery is feasible, effective and highly appreciated among BRCA1/2-PV carriers facing the decision between salpingo-oophorectomy or salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: A very early medical abortion (VEMA) is an abortion early in pregnancy before the pregnancy is visible on an ultrasound. This treatment has been offered in several countries for many years. Our objective was to investigate whether VEMA is also desirable and can be carried out safely, in the Netherlands., Design: Descriptive study., Method: From August 2019 to February 2020 VEMA was offered to women who met the inclusion criteria. A fixed protocol for diagnostic examinations and follow up was used. Ultrasounds and serial human chorionic gonadotrophin assays were used to ensure safety and effectiveness. Satisfaction survey was conducted among clients and employees. The costs of different treatments, including VEMA, were compared., Results: During the study period 693 women received an abortion treatment in our clinic. 69 women met the inclusion criteria for VEMA. Three of them were referred to the local hospital because of an (suspected) ectopic pregnancy. No ectopic pregnancy was missed later in the process. VEMA was effective in 64 women. Two women needed a second treatment. Eight women did not appear for follow-up without an extra reminder. Women and healthcare providers were very satisfied with the offer of VEMA. VEMA was more expensive than other forms of treatment., Conclusion: Our study showed that very early medical abortion is safe and achievable in the Netherlands and highly appreciated. When introducing this treatment, a strict protocol is necessary. We advise to offer this treatment to women who prefer a very early abortion.

Importance: Most women with a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant undergo premature menopause with potential short- and long-term morbidity due to the current method of ovarian carcinoma prevention: risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). Because the fallopian tubes play a key role in ovarian cancer pathogenesis, salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy may be a novel risk-reducing strategy with benefits of delaying menopause., Objective: To compare menopause-related quality of life after risk-reducing salpingectomy (RRS) with delayed oophorectomy with RRSO in carriers of the BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant., Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter nonrandomized controlled preference trial (TUBA study), with patient recruitment between January 16, 2015, and November 7, 2019, and follow-up at 3 and 12 months after surgery was conducted in all Dutch university hospitals and a few large general hospitals. In the Netherlands, RRSO is predominantly performed in these hospitals. Patients at the clinical genetics or gynecology department between the ages of 25 and 40 years (BRCA1) or 25 to 45 years (BRCA2) who were premenopausal, had completed childbearing, and were undergoing no current treatment for cancer were eligible., Interventions: Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy at currently recommended age or RRS after completed childbearing with delayed oophorectomy. After RRSO was performed, hormone replacement therapy was recommended for women without contraindications., Main Outcomes and Measures: Menopause-related quality of life as assessed by the Greene Climacteric Scale, with a higher scale sum (range, 0-63) representing more climacteric symptoms. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, sexual functioning and distress, cancer worry, decisional regret, and surgical outcomes., Results: A total of 577 women (mean [SD] age, 37.2 [3.5] years) were enrolled: 297 (51.5%) were pathogenic BRCA1 variant carriers and 280 (48.5%) were BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. At the time of analysis, 394 patients had undergone RRS and 154 had undergone RRSO. Without hormone replacement therapy, the adjusted mean increase from the baseline score on the Greene Climacteric Scale was 6.7 (95% CI, 5.0-8.4; P < .001) points higher during 1 year after RRSO than after RRS. After RRSO with hormone replacement therapy, the difference was 3.6 points (95% CI, 2.3-4.8; P < .001) compared with RRS., Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this nonrandomized controlled trial suggest that patients have better menopause-related quality of life after RRS than after RRSO, regardless of hormone replacement therapy. An international follow-up study is currently evaluating the oncologic safety of this therapy., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02321228.