Search

Simple Summary: Endometrial cancer has a high epidemiological impact, and its management is part of everyday clinical practice. International guidelines have been arranged over the years according to major recent discoveries. The application of the guidelines released by different international gynecological societies is still matter of debate as they diverge in many issues. Authors wanted to compare them and point out the differences, aiming to both draw the attention to a need of unification and to provide a useful tool for clinicians. Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological malignancy in Europe and its management involves a variety of health professionals. In recent years, big discoveries were made concerning the management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer, particularly in the field of molecular biology and minimally invasive surgery. This requires the continuous updating of guidelines and protocols over the years. In this paper, we aim to summarize and compare common points and disparities among protocols for management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer by leading international gynecological oncological societies. We therefore systematically report the parallel among the guidelines based on the various steps patients with endometrial cancer usually undergo. The comparison between American and European protocols revealed some relevant disparities, in particular regarding surgical staging, molecular biology application as a prognostic tool and follow up regimens. This could possibly cause differences in interpreting and applying protocols in clinical practice in small centers, leading to a lack of adherence to guidelines or even prompting a confusing mix of them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The majority of patients with ovarian cancer relapse within 3 years of first line chemotherapy. Therefore, choosing the most appropriate treatment in the recurrence setting has a fundamental role in defining a patient's prognosis. Treatment options include systemic and intra-peritoneal chemotherapy, secondary cytoreductive surgery, and stereotactic body radiotherapy. The best therapeutic choice depends on multiple factors and not only on treatment-free interval. For systemic therapy, prior lines therapy, residual toxicities, comorbidities, performance status, and patient preferences should be taken into account. Secondary cytoreductive surgery can be proposed in patients in which complete tumor resectability can be predicted and in those with oligometastatic disease. Stereotactic body radiotherapy represents a valid alternative to surgery for oligometastatic disease with high local control and minimal toxicity. Current evidence has demonstrated an emerging role of BRCA mutational status and molecular profiling in the impacting response to systemic and local treatments. Therefore, these could provide guidance in the treatment decision process and help identify patients who respond better to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-inhibitors or immunotherapy or to a combined approach with surgery rather than to platinum-based chemotherapy. Current knowledge in this field could help widen therapeutic options, especially for platinum-resistant patients. In this review, we offer an overview of the state of the art regarding the role of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery in this setting and their implications in clinical practice and in the treatment decision process, so as to provide the best tailored therapy in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© IGCS and ESGO 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)