Search

Objective To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between women treated by laparoscopic, robotic and open approaches for endometrial cancer. Methods Prospective cohort study comparing PRO at baseline, short- (1 and 3 weeks) and long-term (12 and 24 weeks) follow-up postoperatively. Quality of life (QOL) measures were the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G), EuroQol Five Dimensions (EQ-5D), and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Sexual health measures were the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and the Sexual Adjustment and Body Image Scale for Gynecologic Cancer (SABIS-G). Results 468 eligible patients (laparotomy = 92, laparoscopy = 152, robotic = 224) were recruited. There were no significant differences between the laparoscopy and robotic groups for any PRO ( P > 0.05). At short-term follow-up, patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (robotic or laparoscopy) had significantly higher FACT-G ( P P P = 0.02) and improved pain interference ( P = 0.0008), than patients undergoing laparotomy. At long-term follow-up, there were sustained improvements in the FACT-G ( P = 0.035) and the health state EQ-5D visual analogue scale ( P = 0.022). Surgical approach had no impact on sexual health ( P > 0.05); however the mean FSFI score for the entire cohort met clinical cut-offs for sexual dysfunction. Conclusion Minimally invasive approaches result in improved QOL beyond the short-term postoperative period, with benefits noted up to 12 weeks after surgery. This prolonged QOL advantage provides further evidence that MIS should be the standard surgical approach for women with early stage endometrial cancer.

Objective The risk of unexpected uterine leiomyosarcoma (LMS) following surgery for presumed benign leiomyoma is quoted to be between 1 in 498 and 1 in 5000. The objectives of the present study were to determine the prevalence of uterine LMS in a specific patient population and the rate of diagnosis of occult uterine LMS and to evaluate the risk of unintended morcellation of LMS in Saskatchewan. Methods This study was a Canadian Task Force Classification II-2 multicentre retrospective cohort study in academic-affiliated tertiary care centres. All women with the histopathologic diagnosis of uterine LMS in Saskatchewan between January 2000 and December 2014 were included. Women with metastatic LMS at diagnosis or other types of uterine sarcomas were excluded. Data including patients' characteristics, clinical presentation, physical examination findings, imaging, pathology reports, surgical interventions, and survival outcomes were reviewed. Results A total of 28 patients had a confirmed histopathologic diagnosis of LMS over the 15-year study period. Approximately 26 212 hysterectomies were performed in Saskatchewan over the same time frame. The prevalence of uterine LMS in this patient population over the study time frame is estimated to be one in 853. Mean age at diagnosis was 53.8 ± 10.0. Medical records of 25 patients could be retrieved, and 15 cases (60%) had an occult diagnosis. There were five cases of unintended morcellation (one power, four mechanical). Survival outcomes were comparable in women with unintended morcellation of occult disease and in those without morcellation. Conclusion This study contributes to the existing body of literature on morcellation of occult LMS, and it ascertains the rate of LMS in a patient population. The results of this study provide valuable information to health care professionals, policy makers, and women in Saskatchewan so that they may make more informed decisions concerning uterine masses.

Vulvar cancer is an uncommon tumor and represents 3%-5% of all female genital tract malignancies. The overall incidence is 1.5/100,000 women. Histopathologically the vast majority (90%) are squamous cell carcinomas. Primary cloacogenic carcinoma of the vulva is extremely rare with less than 20 cases reported in English literature [1]. These tumors are thought to arise from embryonic or ectopic rests of cloacogenic tissue. The majority of these reported cases is relatively indolent cancer, only one case of cloacogenic carcinoma of the vulva reported metastatic spread to the inguinal lymph nodes and none that describe distant metastases. Here we present an aggressive and diagnostically challenging case of cloacogenic carcinoma of the vulva and a review of current literature to date.

Vulvar cancer is an uncommon tumor and represents 3%-5% of all female genital tract malignancies. Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the most common carcinoma of the vulva. Distant metastasis of recurrent vulvar squamous cell carcinoma is rare and occurs late in the disease process. We report the first case of kidney metastasis from a vulvar squamous cell carcinoma in a 68-year-old Caucasian female. On initial presentation she was treated with radical vulvectomy, upper urethrectomy with bilateral inguinal and deep femoral lymph node dissection. She was staged as FIGO stage IVA and also received adjuvant chemo-radiation. She remained in remission for 24 months. Subsequently she was found to have a kidney tumor and underwent nephrectomy and was diagnosed with metastatic squamous cell carcinoma from the vulva to the kidney. In cases of recurrent vulvar carcinoma distant metastasis to the bones, breast, and brain is only rarely reported. Metastasis to kidneys from vulvar carcinoma is exceptionally rare with no reported cases in the literature. Renal metastasis should be considered in the differential diagnosis of kidney tumor in this group of women.

Objectives Our objectives were (1) to review the rate of concurrent endometrial cancer in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH); (2) to determine the proportion of patients with concurrent endometrial cancer who have high-risk disease; and (3) to re-evaluate our surgical management of AEH. Methods We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients who had surgery on the basis of a preoperative diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia between January 2001 and December 2006. Demographic data, the method of preoperative diagnosis, postoperative grade of tumour, and other postoperative findings were recorded. When applicable, this included cancer stage, lymph node status, and presence of lymphovascular space invasion. In postoperative review, patients were considered to be high risk if they had disease beyond the uterus or a combination of other risk factors. Results Of 70 patients, 25 (35.7%) were found to have concurrent endometrial cancer. This was higher than the commonly accepted rate of 25% ( P = 0.03). Of the 25 patients upgraded, 4 (16%) had high-risk cancer on final pathologic evaluation. Conclusion Simple hysterectomy in women with AEH may result in inadequate surgical management. Simple methods are required to identify patients with a preoperative diagnosis of AEH who may harbour significant cancers.

Objective To provide guidance for referring physicians regarding what gynaecologic oncologists want and do not require in the referral package for a new patient. Methods An email survey was circulated to all members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology of Canada (GOC) asking what they felt was required in a new patient referral package so that they could provide a timely consultation and management plan. Results The survey had a 79% response rate among 121 GOC members. Before referral of patients with endometrial cancer, 50% of respondents did not want additional investigations; only 4% wanted an MRI performed prior to them seeing the patient. For patients with high-grade cancers of the uterus (including serous), 40% wanted to see the patient without further investigations, while 42% wanted a CT scan report to be included in the referral package. For patients with cervical cancer, 56% of respondents wanted to see the patient without any further investigations, while 24% wished to have an MRI report included in the referral package. For patients with vulvar cancer, 50% of respondents did not want any further investigations; for patients with a pelvic mass, the majority of respondents wanted a serum CA 125 level in the referral package, while 0% to 3% only wanted an MRI. The preferred modality for imaging of the chest was a chest X-ray only. Conclusion Our survey indicated that gynaecologic oncologists want little information in the referral package beyond the biopsy result. MRI is not required in the workup of most patients with a pelvic mass or uterine cancer.

Objectives Sentinel lymph node (SLN) procedure could be an attractive solution to the debate on lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer; however challenges to interpreting the literature include marked heterogeneity across studies, a wide variety of injection techniques and a lack of uniformly accepted definitions for important outcomes. We aim to critically appraise the published literature and streamline terminology and methodology for future studies in this field. Methods We conducted a PubMed search and included all original research of endometrial cancer patients having undergone SLN procedure with an n>30. Data collected included injection technique, unilateral, bilateral, and para-aortic detection rates, and ultrastaging results. When different definitions were used for reporting outcomes, we recalculated the original study results according to our proposed definitions. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results Seventeen studies met our inclusion criteria. Injection sites were categorized into cervical versus corporeal. Overall detection rates ranged from 60 to 100%; studies with n>100 all had overall detection rates of >80%. Bilateral detection rates were higher with a combination of two injection agents. Para-aortic mapping was most frequent after corporeal injection techniques (39%), and was higher after deep vs. standard cervical injection (17% vs. 2%). The proportion of metastatic lymph nodes diagnosed through ultrastaging was high (around 40%) and ultrastaging of SLN upstaged approximately 5% of patients. Retrospectively applying a surgical algorithm revealed a sensitivity of 95%, a negative predictive value of 99%, and a false negative rate of 5% (with only 9 false negative cases remaining in total). Conclusion Results of SLN research for endometrial cancer are promising. We believe that in future studies, uniform reporting is needed to improve our understanding of the safety and feasibility of SLN in EC. We propose 2 strategies: a checklist of elements to include in future reports and the standardization of key definitions.

Objective. To evaluate the relationship between surgical specialty and survival in patients receiving initial surgical management for ovarian epithelial cancer. Study methods. An analytic framework was constructed to address the principle question ‘does the type of surgeon operating on patients with newly diagnosed ovarian epithelial cancer influence survival?' A literature search addressing the components of this analytic framework was carried out using the Cochrane Library, Medline, EMBASE, and HealthSTAR databases. Relevant articles were selected and graded using U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and Canadian Task Force guidelines. Results were summarized by quality as well as level of evidence. Results. Eighteen studies were reviewed. The quality of evidence was good in 3, fair in 8, and poor in 7 of the studies. The most common study flaws encountered were ‘failure to account for confounders' and ‘incompleteness of data'. In studies focusing on advanced disease, there was good quality evidence to support a 6- to 9-month median survival benefit for patients operated on by gynecologic oncologists rather than general gynecologists and/or general surgeons ( P values 0.009 to 0.01). Studies focusing on early stage disease found gynecologic oncologists more likely to carry out optimal staging ( P values 0.001 to 0.01). Increased survival could be explained by improved identification of true stage I patients. Conclusion. Patients receiving initial surgical management for ovarian epithelial cancer should be operated on by gynecologic oncologists.

Objectives. The goal of this study was to review our experience with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsies in women with a pelvic mass, with respect to obtaining an adequate sample, the influence of biopsy results on patient management, and patient tolerance. Study methods. We conducted a chart review of all women at the Princess Margaret Hospital (PMH) that had been clinically referred for TRUS-guided biopsies of a pelvic mass. Data collected included patient age, previous type of malignancy, size and location of lesion being biopsied, postbiopsy diagnosis, and subsequent management. Statistics were purely descriptive. Results. Eight women have had this procedure at PMH. The smallest size of lesion biopsied was 1.7 × 1.4 × 2.3 cm. In all eight women, the tissue obtained was adequate for the determination of a histological diagnosis and subsequently influenced patient management. The procedure was well tolerated and there were no complications. Conclusion. TRUS-guided biopsy of a pelvic mass is a feasible method of establishing a pathological diagnosis. In this small series of patients, it was found to be accurate, well tolerated, and useful in guiding patient management. In selected patients, the TRUS biopsy provides a useful alternative to transabdominal and transvaginal biopsy.

Objective To review the evidence relating to the use of adjuvant therapy after surgical treatment for endometrial cancer. Options Women with endometrial cancer can be given the option of receiving adjuvant radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy according to pathologic findings at time of surgery. Outcomes The outcomes measured are postoperative progressionfree and overall survival in endometrial cancer patients. Evidence Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library, using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g., endometrial neoplasms) and key words (e.g., endometrium cancer, endometrial carcinoma). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. There were no date or language restrictions. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to December 31, 2011. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, national and international medical specialty societies, and recent conference abstracts. Values The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table). Benefits, harms, and costs This guideline is intended to help standardize postoperative treatment of endometrial cancer and minimize undertreatment and overtreatment. Validation The guideline was reviewed for accuracy by content experts in pathology, radiation oncology, and medical oncology. Guideline content was also compared with relevant documents from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) E6/E7 oncogene expression may be more predictive of cervical cancer risk than testing for HPV DNA. The Aptima HPV test (Gen-Probe) detects E6/E7 mRNA of 14 oncogenic types. Its clinical performance was compared with that of the Hybrid Capture 2 DNA test (HC2; Qiagen) in women referred for colposcopy and those routinely screened. Aptima was also compared with the PreTect HPV-Proofer E6/E7 mRNA assay (Proofer; Norchip) in the referral population. Cervical specimens collected in PreservCyt (Hologic Inc.) were processed for HPV detection and genotyping with the Linear Array (LA) method (Roche Molecular Diagnostics, Laval, Quebec, Canada). Histology-confirmed high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2) or worse (CIN 2+) served as the disease endpoint. On the basis of 1,418 referral cases (CIN 2+, n = 401), the sensitivity of Aptima was 96.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.4, 98.2), whereas it was 94.3% (95% CI, 92.0, 96.6) for HC2. The specificities were 43.2% (95% CI, 40.2, 46.2) and 38.7% (95% CI, 35.7, 41.7), respectively ( P < 0.05). In 1,373 women undergoing routine screening (CIN 2+, n = 7), both Aptima and HC2 showed 100% sensitivity, and the specificities were 88.3% (95% CI, 86.6, 90.0) and 85.3% (95% CI, 83.5, 87.3), respectively ( P < 0.05); for women ≥30 years of age ( n = 845), the specificities were 93.9% (95% CI, 92.3, 95.5) and 92.1% (95% CI, 90.3, 93.9), respectively ( P < 0.05). On the basis of 818 referral cases (CIN 2+, n = 235), the sensitivity of Aptima was 94.9% (95% CI, 92.1, 97.7) and that of Proofer was 79.1% (95% CI, 73.9, 84.3), and the specificities were 45.8% (95% CI, 41.8, 49.8) and 75.1% (95% CI, 71.6, 78.6), respectively ( P < 0.05). Both Aptima and Proofer showed a higher degree of agreement with LA genotyping than HC2. In conclusion, the Aptima test is as sensitive as HC2 but more specific for detecting CIN 2+ and can serve as a reliable test for both primary cervical cancer screening and the triage of borderline cytological abnormalities.

Objective Women attending the University of Saskatchewan Student Health Services are being offered human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination but are not filling their prescriptions. We sought to identify gaps in knowledge of the link between HPV infection, cervical dysplasia, and cervical cancer among women attending the Student Health Services, and to identify barriers to HPV vaccination among this cohort of women. Methods Women attending the University of Saskatchewan Student Health Services for any reason were invited to complete an 18-question survey. The survey included questions regarding knowledge of the purpose of Pap smears, the role of HPV infection in cervical dysplasia and cancer, and HPV vaccination. The questions were designed to elicit both quantitative and qualitative data. Data analysis included basic descriptive analysis and summarization of qualitative data. Results Four hundred surveys were distributed, and 371 (91 %) were returned. Eighty-two percent of participants were aware of the HPV vaccine, and 40% ranked their knowledge of HPV as good or very good; however, only 6% correctly answered questions about methods of preventing HPV infection. Participants identified cost (62%), concerns over adverse effects (43%), and lack of knowledge (36%) as barriers to undergoing vaccination. Comments about the HPV vaccine reflected frustration with cost and concerns about adverse effects. When participants were asked if they would undergo vaccination if it were free, 60% responded "yes," 31 % responded "maybe," and 8% responded "no." Conclusion The young women in our survey had significant gaps in knowledge of HPV infection and prevention, and educational programs must be structured to address these deficits. Institutions promoting vaccination must deal with the barriers of cost and fear of adverse effects.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing has a higher clinical sensitivity than cytology for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or worse (CIN 2+). However, an improvement in specificity would be desirable. As malignant transformation is induced by HPV E6/E7 oncogenes, detection of E6/E7 oncogene activity may improve specificity and be more predictive of cervical cancer risk. The PreTect HPV-Proofer assay (Proofer; Norchip) detects E6/E7 mRNA transcripts from HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, and 45 with simultaneous genotype-specific identification. The clinical performance of this assay was assessed in a cross-sectional study of women referred for colposcopy in comparison with the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen) test, which detects DNA of 13 high-risk oncogenic HPV types collectively. Cervical specimens were collected in PreservCyt, and cytology was performed using the ThinPrep method (Hologic). The samples were processed for HPV detection with Proofer and HC2 and genotyping with the Linear Array method (Roche Molecular Systems). Histology-confirmed CIN 2+ served as the disease endpoint to assess the clinical performance of the tests. A total of 1,551 women were studied, and of these, 402 (25.9%) were diagnosed with CIN 2+ on histology. The Proofer assay showed a sensitivity of 78.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 74.1 to 82.1) versus 95.8% (95% CI, 93.8 to 97.8) for HC2 ( P < 0.05) and a specificity of 75.5% (95% CI, 73.0 to 78.0) versus 39.6% (95% CI, 36.8 to 42.4), respectively ( P < 0.05). The lower sensitivity and higher specificity of Proofer for detection of CIN 2+ can be attributed to the fact that this test detects the expression of E6/E7 genes beyond a threshold from a limited number of oncogenic HPV types. In conclusion, Proofer is more specific than HC2 in identifying women with CIN 2+ but has a lower sensitivity.

To optimize the management of adnexal masses and to assist primary care physicians and gynaecologists determine which patients presenting with an ovarian mass with a significant risk of malignancy should be considered for gynaecologic oncology referral and management.Laparoscopic evaluation, comprehensive surgical staging for early ovarian cancer, or tumour debulking for advanced stage ovarian cancer.To optimize conservative versus operative management of women with possible ovarian malignancy and to optimize the involvement of gynaecologic oncologists in planning and delivery of treatment.Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed or MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library, using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words. Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified by searching the web sites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.1. Primary care physicians and gynaecologists should always consider the possibility of an underlying ovarian cancer in patients in any age group who present with an adnexal or ovarian mass. (II-2B) 2. Appropriate workup of a perimenopausal or postmenopausal woman presenting with an adnexal mass should include evaluation of symptoms and signs suggestive of malignancy, such as persistent pelvic/abdominal pain, urinary urgency/frequency, increased abdominal size/bloating, and difficulty eating. In addition, CA125 measurement should be considered. (II-2B) 3. Transvaginal or transabdominal ultrasound examination is recommended as part of the initial workup of a complex adnexal/ovarian mass. (II-2B) 4. Ultrasound reports should be standardized to include size and unilateral/bilateral location of the adnexal mass and its possible origin, thickness of septations, presence of excrescences and internal solid components, vascular flow distribution pattern, and presence or absence of ascites. This information is essential for calculating the risk of malignancy index II score to identify pelvic mass with high malignant potential. (IIIC) 5. Patients deemed to have a high risk of an underlying malignancy should be reviewed in consultation with a gynaecologic oncologist for assessment and optimal surgical management. (II-2B).

Objective To review current practice and make recommendations for the management and treatment of endometrial cancer. Outcomes This guideline makes recommendations with respect to extended surgical staging, which provides important prognostic information and aids in determining the need for adjuvant treatments. Evidence Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library, using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g., endometrial neoplasms) and key words (e.g., endometrium cancer, endometrial carcinoma). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. There were no date or language restrictions. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to December 31, 2011. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, national and international medical specialty societies, and recent conference abstracts Benefits, harms, and costs This guideline reviews the benefit of extended surgical staging compared with the potential harm of a limited surgery in grade 2 and 3 disease. Values The quality of evidence is rated and recommendations are made using the criteria described by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table).

Objective To review the evidence relating to the epidemiology of endometrial cancer and its diagnostic workups. Options Women with possible endometrial cancer can undergo an endometrial evaluation by office biopsy, hysteroscopy, or dilatation and curettage. To assist in treatment planning, pelvic ultrasound, CT scan, or MRI may be considered. Outcomes The identification of optimal diagnostic tests to evaluate patients with possible endometrial cancer. Evidence Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library, using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g., endometrial neoplasms) and key words (e.g., endometrium cancer, endometrial carcinoma). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. There were no date or language restrictions. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to December 31, 2011. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, national and international medical specialty societies, and recent conference abstracts. Values The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table). Benefits, harms, and costs This document is intended to guide the development of a standardized cost-effective investigation of patients with suspected endometrial cancer. Validation The guideline was reviewed for accuracy by experts in pathology, radiation oncology, and medical oncology. Guideline content was also compared with relevant documents from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Objective: Women attending the University of Saskatchewan Student Health Services are being offered human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination but are not filling their prescriptions. We sought to identify gaps in knowledge of the link between HPV infection, cervical dysplasia, and cervical cancer among women attending the Student Health Services, and to identify barriers to HPV vaccination among this cohort of women.