Search

Introduction:Therapeutic options in advanced or recurrent vulvar cancer are limited. The identification of new prognostic factors and markers for therapy stratification is therefore highly desirable. Carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX) is up-regulated in various solid tumors and a promising new target. We therefore determined CAIX serum concentration and its prognostic relevance in correlation to intratumoral CAIX expression in patients with primary vulvar cancer.Methods:Thirty-one serum samples of patients with primary vulvar cancer were prospectively collected before surgery and analyzed for CAIX by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In addition, intratumoral CAIX expression was determined by immunohistochemistry and correlation with serum CAIX and clinicopathological factors, and outcome was analyzed.Results:Preoperative serum concentration of CAIX ranged between 56 and 879 pg/mL (median, 147 pg/mL; mean, 237.29) and was significantly higher in patients with high intratumoral expression (median, 269 pg/mL vs 126 pg/mL,P= 0.03). High serum CAIX was not associated with any of the analyzed clinicopathological parameters. However, disease-free survival was shorter in patients with high preoperative serum CAIX (above median;P= 0.012). By immunohistochemistry, 26% of the tumors showed a moderate or strong expression of CAIX, whereas 74% showed weak or no expression. High intratumoral expression of CAIX was also associated with unfavorable disease-free survival (P= 0.043).Conclusions:Carbonic anhydrase IX serum concentration is higher in patients with high intratumoral expression, and elevated preoperative serum values are associated with unfavorable prognosis. Serum CAIX might therefore be an easily assessable marker to stratify patients for adjuvant therapy and potentially monitor response. Carbonic anhydrase IX is differentially expressed in vulvar cancer and potentially associated with negative outcome.

Due to an increasing incidence with concurrently decreasing age at onset, vulvar cancer represents a current challenge for gynecologic oncologists. Positive lymph nodes of the groins have been proven to be the most important prognostic factor for affected patients, significantly impairing overall survival. Distinct criteria for indication of adjuvant therapy following primary tumor resection and groin surgery are still under debate. At present, only patients with two or more positive lymph nodes are treated with adjuvant radiotherapy despite growing evidence that patients with only one nodal macrometastasis already have a significantly worse outcome and might benefit from adjuvant treatment. This review discusses existing evidence focusing on different therapeutic approaches and their potential indication in vulvar cancer. Based on the available data the need for future trials is being elaborated.

Treatment of patients with vulvar cancer is challenging for gynaecologic oncologists. Owing to the localization in a sensitive area, surgical radicality and the indication for adjuvant treatment have to be balanced with psychosocial aspects to treat patients adequately. Clinical management is therefore highly dependent on the tumour stage. For patients with early-stage disease (FIGO I–II) therapy mainly concentrates on surgery with resection of the primary tumour and staging of the groin lymph nodes. In intermediate-stage vulvar cancer (FIGO III), advanced disease is expressed by affected inguinofemoral lymph nodes bringing radical lymphadenectomy and adjuvant therapy as well as radiation or chemoradiation into the focus of treatment. For locally advanced or metastatic vulvar cancer (FIGO IV) neoadjuvant or definitive chemoradiation has to be considered besides surgery. Owing to the low incidence of the disease, the level of evidence for different treatment modalities is poor. This review therefore puts different recommendations of clinical management in context and highlights the need for future trials.

Aims Vulvar cancer is a rare disease with increasing incidence over the last decades. Treatment includes surgical, radio- and chemotherapeutical options; however, due to the low incidence of the disease and the lack of randomised trials many questions regarding indication of different treatment approaches remain unanswered. This article discusses the current literature to elaborate recommendations for the management of primary vulvar cancer in clinical routine. Methods We reviewed the available literature on treatment of invasive vulvar cancer with emphasis on therapeutic strategies such as surgery and radio/chemotherapy. Results Surgery of the primary tumour and the groins remain the cornerstone of treatment in vulvar cancer with a strong trend towards a less radical approach in early stage disease. Complete vulvectomy was replaced by radical local excision with plastic reconstruction and the sentinel node technique was implemented to avoid the morbidity of complete groin dissection in node negative patients. In patients with advanced primary disease, treatment decisions are still a challenge. Criteria for the indication and performance of chemo/radiotherapy of the vulva/groins/pelvis are still not fully established and vary between different countries and institutions due to the low level of evidence. Often an individualised therapeutic approach aside from guidelines is necessary to treat these patients adequately. Conclusions To enable reasonable treatment decisions and avoid unnecessary morbidity, treatment in specialised centres should be intended at any time. Clinical studies performed by several study groups on an international level are urgently needed to further improve therapy.

A tumor-free resection margin of at least 8 mm is considered state of the art in vulvar cancer. This standard is based on small and heterogeneous patient cohorts, and its implementation can result in mutilation. One hundred two consecutive patients with primary squamous cell vulvar cancer were analyzed. All patients received resection of the primary tumor and the inguinofemoral lymph nodes via three separate incisions, resulting in complete tumor resection. Median follow-up was 31 months. Minimal margin distances were pathologically determined in all dimensions after fixation. Median age of the patients was 62 years; 38.2% had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I, 17.6% stage II, 24.4% stage III, and 8.8% stage IV disease. The median minimal resection margin was 5 mm (range 0.5–25 mm). Sixteen patients (15.6%) developed disease recurrence, of whom 10 (62.5%) at the vulva. Margin distance had no significant impact on disease-free survival when analyzed continuously (p = 0.388). When cases were divided into three subgroups of