Search

Summary The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer, first published in April 2018, was reviewed in its entirety between April 2020 and January 2022 and updated. The review was carried out at the request of German Cancer Aid as part of the Oncology Guidelines Program and the lead coordinators were the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), the Gynecology Oncology Working Group (AGO) of the German Cancer Society (DKG) and the German Cancer Aid (DKH). The guideline update was based on a systematic search and assessment of the literature published between 2016 and 2020. All statements, recommendations and background texts were reviewed and either confirmed or amended. New statements and recommendations were included where necessary. Aim The use of evidence-based risk-adapted therapies to treat low-risk women with endometrial cancer prevents unnecessarily radical surgery and avoids non-beneficial adjuvant radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy. For women with endometrial cancer and a high risk of recurrence, the guideline defines the optimum level of radical surgery and indicates whether chemotherapy and/or adjuvant radiation therapy is necessary. This should improve the survival rates and quality of life of these patients. The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer and the quality indicators based on the guideline aim to provide the basis for the work of certified gynecological cancer centers. Methods The guideline was first compiled in 2018 in accordance with the requirements for S3-level guidelines and was updated in 2022. The update included an adaptation of the source guidelines identified using the German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal (DELBI). The update also used evidence reviews which were created based on selected literature obtained from systematic searches in selected literature databases using the PICO process. The Clinical Guidelines Service Group was tasked with carrying out a systematic search and assessment of the literature. Their results were used by interdisciplinary working groups as a basis for developing suggestions for recommendations and statements which were then modified during structured online consensus conferences and/or additionally amended online using the DELPHI process to achieve a consensus. Recommendations Part 2 of this short version of the guideline provides recommendations on the treatment of precancerous lesions and early-stage endometrial cancer, surgical treatment, radiotherapy and drug-based therapy, follow-up, recurrence, and metastasis of endometrial cancer as well as the state of psycho-oncological care, palliative care, patient education, rehabilitative and physiotherapeutic care., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest/Interessenkonflikt The conflicts of interest of the authors are listed in the long German-language version of the guideline. Die Interessenkonflikte der Autoren sind in der Langfassung der Leitlinie aufgelistet., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Summary The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer, first published in April 2018, was reviewed in its entirety between April 2020 and January 2022 and updated. The review was carried out at the request of German Cancer Aid as part of the Oncology Guidelines Program and the lead coordinators were the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), the Gynecology Oncology Working Group (AGO) of the German Cancer Society (DKG) and the German Cancer Aid (DKH). The guideline update was based on a systematic search and assessment of the literature published between 2016 and 2020. All statements, recommendations and background texts were reviewed and either confirmed or amended. New statements and recommendations were included where necessary. Aim The use of evidence-based risk-adapted therapies to treat women with endometrial cancer of low risk prevents unnecessarily radical surgery and avoids non-beneficial adjuvant radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy. For women with endometrial cancer and a high risk of recurrence, the guideline defines the optimum level of radical surgery and indicates whether chemotherapy and/or adjuvant radiation therapy is necessary. This should improve the survival rates and quality of life of these patients. The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer and the quality indicators based on the guideline aim to provide the basis for the work of certified gynecological cancer centers. Methods The guideline was first compiled in 2018 in accordance with the requirements for S3-level guidelines and was updated in 2022. The update included an adaptation of the source guidelines identified using the German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal (DELBI). The update also used evidence reviews which were created based on selected literature obtained from systematic searches in selected literature databases using the PICO process. The Clinical Guidelines Service Group was tasked with carrying out a systematic search and assessment of the literature. Their results were used by interdisciplinary working groups as a basis for developing suggestions for recommendations and statements which were then modified during structured online consensus conferences and/or additionally amended online using the DELPHI process to achieve a consensus. Recommendations Part 1 of this short version of the guideline provides recommendations on epidemiology, screening, diagnosis, and hereditary factors. The epidemiology of endometrial cancer and the risk factors for developing endometrial cancer are presented. The options for screening and the methods used to diagnose endometrial cancer are outlined. Recommendations are given for the prevention, diagnosis, and therapy of hereditary forms of endometrial cancer. The use of geriatric assessment is considered and existing structures of care are presented., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest/Interessenkonflikt The conflicts of interest of the authors are listed in the long German-language version of the guideline./Die Interessenkonflikte der Autoren sind in der Langfassung der Leitlinie aufgelistet., (© Thieme Medical Publishers.)

In recent years complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has increasingly been the focus of international research. Numerous subsidised trials (7903) and systematic reviews (651) have been published, and the evidence is starting to be integrated into treatment guidelines. However, due to insufficient evidence and/or insufficient good quality evidence, this has mostly not translated to practice recommendations in reviews by the Cochrane collaboration gynaecology group. There is nevertheless a not insignificant number of CAM providers and users. The percentage of oncology patients who use CAM varies between 5 and 90 %. Doctors have been identified as the main providers of CAM. Half of gynaecologists offer CAM because of personal conviction or on suggestion from colleagues. This must be viewed in a critical light, since CAM is mostly practiced without appropriate training, often without sufficient evidence for a given method - and where evidence exists, practice guidelines are lacking - and lack of safety or efficacy testing. The combination of patient demand and lucrativeness for doctors/alternative medicine practitioners, both based on supposed effectiveness CAM, often leads to its indiscriminate use with uncertain outcomes and significant cost for patients. On the other hand there is published, positive level I evidence for a number of CAM treatment forms. The aim of this article is therefore to review the available evidence for CAM in gynaecological oncology practice. The continued need for research is highlighted, as is the need to integrate practices supported by good evidence into conventional gynaecological oncology.

Introduction: Stereotactically-guided core needle biopsies (CNB) of breast tumours allow histological examination of the tumour without surgery. Touch imprint cytology (TIC) of CNB promises to be useful in providing same-day diagnosis for counselling purposes and for planning future surgery. Having addressed the issue of accuracy of immediate microscopic evaluation of TIC, we wanted to re-examine the usefulness of this procedure in light of the present health care climate of cost containment by incorporating the surgical 15-year follow-up data and outcome. Patients and Methods: From January until December 1996 we performed TIC in core needle biopsies of 173 breast tumours in 169 patients, consisting of 122 malignant and 51 benign tumours. Histology of core needle biopsies was proven by surgical histology in all malignant and in 5 benign tumours. Surgical breast biopsy was not performed in 46 patients with 46 benign lesions, as the histological result from the core needle biopsy and the result of the TIC were in agreement with the suspected diagnosis from the complementary breast diagnostics. A 15-year follow-up of these patients followed in 2013 and follow-up data was collected from 40 women. Results: In the 15-year follow-up of the 40 benign lesions primarily confirmed using CNB and TIC, a diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value and accuracy of 100 % was found. Conclusion: TIC and stereotactically guided CNB showed excellent long-term follow-up in patients with benign breast lesions. The use of TIC to complement CNB can therefore provide immediate cytological diagnosis of breast lesions.