Search

Objective. The COVID-19-pandemic caused drastic healthcare changes worldwide. To date, the impact of these changes on gynecological cancer healthcare is relatively unknown. This study aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19-pandemic on surgical gynecological-oncology healthcare. Methods. This population-based cohort study included all surgical procedures with curative intent for gynecological malignancies, registered in the Dutch Gynecological Oncology Audit, in 2018-2020. Four periods were identified based on COVID-19 hospital admission rates: 'Pre-COVID-19', 'Firstwave', 'Interimperiod', and'Second wave'. Surgical volume, perioperative care processes, and postoperative outcomes from 2020 were compared with 2018-2019. Results. A total of 11,488 surgical procedureswere analyzed. For cervical cancer, surgical volume decreased by 17.2% in 2020 compared to 2018-2019 (mean 2018-2019: n= 542.5, 2020: n= 449). At nadir (interimperiod), only 51% of the expected cervical cancer procedures were performed. For ovarian, vulvar, and endometrial cancer, volumes remained stable. Patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer more frequently received neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 2020 compared to 2018-2019 (67.7% (n = 432) vs. 61.8% (n = 783), p = 0.011). Median time to first treatmentwas significantly shorter in all four malignancies in 2020. For vulvar and endometrial cancer, the length of hospital staywas significantly shorter in 2020. No significant differences in complicated course and 30-day-mortality were observed. Conclusions. The COVID-19-pandemic impacted surgical gynecological-oncology healthcare: in 2020, surgical volume for cervical cancer dropped considerably, waiting time was significantly shorter for all malignancies, while neoadjuvant chemotherapy administration for advanced-stage ovarian cancer increased. The safety of perioperative healthcare was not negatively impacted by the pandemic, as complications and 30-day-mortality remained stable. (C) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Background Sexual problems are frequently reported after treatment with radiotherapy (RT) for gynaecological cancer (GC), in particular after combined external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy (EBRT+BT). Studies demonstrate that psychosexual support should include cognitive behavioural interventions and involvement of the patient’s partner, if available. Therefore, we developed a nurse-led sexual rehabilitation intervention, including these key components. The intervention was previously pilot-tested and results demonstrated that this intervention improves women’s sexual functioning and increases dilator compliance. The objective of the current study is to investigate the (cost-)effectiveness of the intervention compared to optimal care as usual (CAU). We expect that women who receive the intervention will report a statistically significant greater improvement in sexual functioning and – for women who receive EBRT+BT – higher compliance with dilator use, from baseline to 12 months post-RT than women who receive optimal care as usual (CAU). Methods/design The intervention is evaluated in the SPARC (Sexual rehabilitation Programme After Radiotherapy for gynaecological Cancer) study, a multicentre, randomized controlled trial (RCT). The primary endpoint is sexual functioning. Secondary outcomes include body image, fear of sexual activity, sexual-, treatment-related- and psychological distress, health-related quality of life and relationship satisfaction. A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) will be conducted in which the costs of the intervention will be related to shifts in other health care costs and the impact on patient outcome. The study sample will consist of 220 women with GC treated with RT in specialized GC treatment centres (N = 10). Participants are randomized to either the intervention- or CAU control group (1:1), and within each centre stratified by type of radiotherapy (EBRT+BT vs. EBRT only) and having a partner (yes/no). All women complete questionnaires at baseline (T1) and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-RT (T2, T3, T4 and T5, respectively). Discussion There is a need to improve sexual functioning after RT for GC. This RCT will provide evidence about the (cost-)effectiveness of a nurse-led sexual rehabilitation intervention. If proven effective, the intervention will be a much needed addition to care offered to GC survivors and will result in improved quality of life. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03611517. Registered 2 August 2018.

Contains fulltext : 229838.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) OBJECTIVE: The PORTEC-4a trial investigates molecular-integrated risk profile guided adjuvant treatment for endometrial cancer. The quality assurance programme included a dummy run for vaginal brachytherapy prior to site activation, and annual quality assurance to verify protocol adherence. Aims of this study were to evaluate vaginal brachytherapy quality and protocol adherence. METHODS: For the dummy run, institutes were invited to create a brachytherapy plan on a provided CT-scan with the applicator in situ. For annual quality assurance, institutes provided data of one randomly selected brachytherapy case. A brachytherapy panel reviewed and scored the brachytherapy plans according to a checklist. RESULTS: At the dummy run, 15 out of 21 (71.4%) institutes needed adjustments of delineation or planning. After adjustments, the mean dose at the vaginal apex (protocol: 100%; 7 Gy) decreased from 100.7% to 99.9% and range and standard deviation (SD) narrowed from 83.6-135.1 to 96.4-101.4 and 8.8 to 1.1, respectively. At annual quality assurance, 22 out of 27 (81.5%) cases had no or minor and 5 out of 27 (18.5%) major deviations. Most deviations were related to delineation, mean dose at the vaginal apex (98.0%, 74.7-114.2, SD 7.6) or reference volume length. CONCLUSIONS: Most feedback during the brachytherapy quality assurance procedure of the PORTEC-4a trial was related to delineation, dose at the vaginal apex and the reference volume length. Annual quality assurance is essential to promote protocol compliance, ensuring high quality vaginal brachytherapy in all participating institutes.

BACKGROUND: PORTEC-2 was a randomised trial for women with high-intermediate risk (HIR) endometrial cancer, comparing pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with vaginal brachytherapy (VBT). We evaluated long-term outcomes combined with the results of pathology review and molecular analysis.METHODS: 427 women with HIR endometrial cancer were randomised between 2002-2006 to VBT or EBRT. Primary endpoint was vaginal recurrence (VR). Pathology review was done in 97.4%, combined with molecular analysis.RESULTS: Median follow-up was 116 months; 10-year VR was 3.4% versus 2.4% for VBT vs. EBRT (p = 0.55). Ten-year pelvic recurrence (PR) was more frequent in the VBT group (6.3% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.004), mostly combined with distant metastases (DM). Tenyear isolated PR was 2.5% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.10, and DM 10.4 vs. 8.9% (p = 0.45). Overall survival for VBT vs. EBRT was 69.5% vs. 67.6% at 10 years (p = 0.72). L1CAM and p53-mutant expression and substantial lymph-vascular space invasion were risk factors for PR and DM. EBRT reduced PR in cases with these risk factors.CONCLUSION: Long-term results of the PORTEC-2 trial confirm VBT as standard adjuvant treatment for HIR endometrial cancer. Molecular risk assessment has the potential to guide adjuvant therapy. EBRT provided better pelvic control in patients with unfavourable risk factors.

Purpose: To evaluate the very long-term results of the randomized Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma (PORTEC)-1 trial for patients with Stage I endometrial carcinoma (EC), focusing on the role of prognostic factors for treatment selection and the long-term risk of second cancers.Patients and Methods: The PORTEC trial (1990-1997) included 714 patients with Stage IC Grade 1-2 or Stage IB Grade 2-3 EC. After surgery, patients were randomly allocated to external-beam pelvic radiotherapy (EBRT) or no additional treatment (NAT). Analysis was by intention to treat.Results: 426 patients were alive at the date of analysis. The median follow-up time was 13.3 years. The 15-year actuarial locoregional recurrence (LRR) rates were 6% for EBRT vs. 15.5% for NAT (p 60 (HR 3.9, p = 0.002 for LRR and 2.7, p = 0.01 for EC death) and myometrial invasion > 50% (HR 1.9, p = 0.03 and HR 1.9, p = 0.02).Conclusions: The 15-year outcomes of PORTEC-1 confirm the relevance of HIR criteria for treatment selection, and a trend for long-term risk of second cancers. EBRT should be avoided in patients with low-and intermediate-risk EC. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc.

Summary Background After surgery for intermediate-risk endometrial carcinoma, the vagina is the most frequent site of recurrence. This study established whether vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) is as effective as pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in prevention of vaginal recurrence, with fewer adverse effects and improved quality of life. Methods In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial undertaken in 19 Dutch radiation oncology centres, 427 patients with stage I or IIA endometrial carcinoma with features of high-intermediate risk were randomly assigned by a computer-generated, biased coin minimisation procedure to pelvic EBRT (46 Gy in 23 fractions; n=214) or VBT (21 Gy high-dose rate in three fractions, or 30 Gy low-dose rate; n=213). All investigators were masked to the assignment of treatment group. The primary endpoint was vaginal recurrence. The predefined non-inferiority margin was an absolute difference of 6% in vaginal recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat, with competing risk methods. The study is registered, number ISRCTN16228756. Findings At median follow-up of 45 months (range 18–78), three vaginal recurrences had been diagnosed after VBT and four after EBRT. Estimated 5-year rates of vaginal recurrence were 1·8% (95% CI 0·6–5·9) for VBT and 1·6% (0·5–4·9) for EBRT (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78, 95% CI 0·17–3·49; p=0·74). 5-year rates of locoregional relapse (vaginal or pelvic recurrence, or both) were 5·1% (2·8–9·6) for VBT and 2·1% (0·8–5·8) for EBRT (HR 2·08, 0·71–6·09; p=0·17). 1·5% (0·5–4·5) versus 0·5% (0·1–3·4) of patients presented with isolated pelvic recurrence (HR 3·10, 0·32–29·9; p=0·30), and rates of distant metastases were similar (8·3% [5·1–13·4] vs 5·7% [3·3–9·9]; HR 1·32, 0·63–2·74; p=0·46). We recorded no differences in overall (84·8% [95% CI 79·3–90·3] vs 79·6% [71·2–88·0]; HR 1·17, 0·69–1·98; p=0·57) or disease-free survival (82·7% [76·9–88·6] vs 78·1% [69·7–86·5]; HR 1·09, 0·66–1·78; p=0·74). Rates of acute grade 1–2 gastrointestinal toxicity were significantly lower in the VBT group than in the EBRT group at completion of radiotherapy (12·6% [27/215] vs 53·8% [112/208]). Interpretation VBT is effective in ensuring vaginal control, with fewer gastrointestinal toxic effects than with EBRT. VBT should be the adjuvant treatment of choice for patients with endometrial carcinoma of high-intermediate risk. Funding Dutch Cancer Society.