Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Neoadjuvant Treatment versus Standard Radio-Chemotherapy—An Updated Meta-Analysis.

Simple Summary: Cervical cancer is among the most common cancers in women and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in females. In developing countries, 6% of diagnoses occur in the advanced stages of the disease. Locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is defined as stage IB2-IVA, according to the FIGO 2009 classification. Chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is the preferred treatment, but 30% of patients relapse after treatment and may suffer from late toxicity. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by radical surgery is a common but controversial option, as it can delay curative treatments. Adjuvant surgery after CCRT has shown promising results, with studies indicating potential benefits in disease control and survival rates. However, guidelines mainly suggest exclusive chemoradiotherapy, though a proportion of patients might need additional treatment with surgery. This study compares the oncological outcomes of LACC patients undergoing standard treatments versus those with adjuvant surgery post-CCRT or NACT. Initial findings suggest that adjuvant surgery could improve local control and overall survival in specific patient groups, though further research is needed to confirm these results. Background: The treatment of choice for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is definitive concurrent radio chemotherapy which consists of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy (CCRT), with the possible addition of brachytherapy (BT). However, the benefits of adjuvant surgery after neoadjuvant treatments remain a debated issue and a still open question in the literature. This meta-analysis aims to provide an updated view on the controversial topic, focusing on comparing surgery after any adjuvant treatment and standard treatment. Methods: Following the recommendations in the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, the PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched in April 2023 for early publications. No limitations on the country were applied. Only English articles were considered. The comparative studies containing data about disease-free survival (DFS) and/or overall survival (OS) were included in the meta-analysis. Results: The CCRT + surgery group showed a significantly better DFS than CCRT (RR 0.69 [95% CI 0.58–0.81] p < 0.01) and a better OS (RR 0.70 [95% CI 0.55–0.89] p < 0.01). Nine studies comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) plus surgery and CCRT were also enrolled. The NACT + surgery group showed a significantly better DFS than CCRT (RR 0.66 [95% CI 0.45–0.97] p < 0.01) and a better OS (RR 0.56 [95% CI 0.38–0.83] p < 0.01). In the sub-analysis of three randomized control trials, the surgery group documented a non-significantly better DFS and OS than CCRT (OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.67–1.80] p = 0.72; I² = 69% p = 0.72; OR 1.09 [95% CI 0.63–1.91] p = 0.75; I² = 13% p = 0.32). Conclusion: The results provide updated findings about the efficacy of neoadjuvant treatments, indicating significantly improved DFS and OS in patients undergoing hysterectomy after CCRT or NACT compared with patients undergoing standard treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]