Objective To revise FIGO staging of carcinoma of the cervix uteri, allowing incorporation of imaging and/or pathological findings, and clinical assessment of tumor size and disease extent. Methods Review of literature and consensus view of the FIGO Gynecologic Oncology Committee and related societies and organizations. Results In stage I, revision of the definition of microinvasion and lesion size as follows. Stage IA: lateral extension measurement is removed; stage IB has three subgroups—stage IB1: invasive carcinomas ≥5 mm and <2 cm in greatest diameter; stage IB2: tumors 2–4 cm; stage IB3: tumors ≥4 cm. Imaging or pathology findings may be used to assess retroperitoneal lymph nodes; if metastatic, the case is assigned stage IIIC; if only pelvic lymph nodes, the case is assigned stage IIIC1; if para‐aortic nodes are involved, the case is assigned stage IIIC2. Notations ‘r’ and ‘p’ will indicate the method used to derive the stage—i.e., imaging or pathology, respectively—and should be recorded. Routine investigations and other methods (e.g., examination under anesthesia, cystoscopy, proctoscopy, etc.) are not mandatory and are to be recommended based on clinical findings and standard of care. Conclusion The revised cervical cancer staging is applicable to all resource levels. Data collection and publication will inform future revisions.

Purpose We compared the efficacy and toxicity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery versus standard cisplatin-based chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced squamous cervical cancer. Patients and Methods This was a single-center, phase III, randomized controlled trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00193739). Eligible patients were between 18 and 65 years old and had stage IB2, IIA, or IIB squamous cervical cancer. They were randomly assigned, after stratification by stage, to receive either three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy using paclitaxel and carboplatin once every 3 weeks followed by radical hysterectomy or standard radiotherapy with concomitant cisplatin once every week for 5 weeks. Patients in the neoadjuvant group received postoperative adjuvant radiation or concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, if indicated. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS), defined as survival without relapse or death related to cancer, and secondary end points included overall survival and toxicity. Results Between September 2003 and February 2015, 635 patients were randomly assigned, of whom 633 (316 patients in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery group and 317 patients in the concomitant chemoradiation group) were included in the final analysis, with a median follow-up time of 58.5 months. The 5-year DFS in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery group was 69.3% compared with 76.7% in the concomitant chemoradiation group (hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.87; P = .038), whereas the corresponding 5-year OS rates were 75.4% and 74.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.025; 95% CI, 0.752 to 1.398; P = .87). The delayed toxicities at 24 months or later after treatment completion in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery group versus the concomitant chemoradiation group were rectal (2.2% v 3.5%, respectively), bladder (1.6% v 3.5%, respectively), and vaginal (12.0% v 25.6%, respectively). Conclusion Cisplatin-based concomitant chemoradiation resulted in superior DFS compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery in locally advanced cervical cancer.

Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20–60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04384926 . Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include...

PURPOSE Postoperative Adjuvant Radiation in Cervical Cancer (PARCER), a phase III randomized trial, compared late toxicity after image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in women with cervical cancer undergoing postoperative radiation. METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive either IG-IMRT or 3D-CRT after stratification for the type of hysterectomy and use of concurrent chemotherapy. The primary end point was 3-year grade ≥ 2 late GI toxicity assessed using Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events v 3.0 and estimated using time-to-event, intention-to-treat analysis, with a study level type I error of 0.05 and a nominal α of .047 after accounting for one interim analysis. Secondary end points included acute toxicity, health-related quality of life, and pelvic relapse-free, disease-free, and overall survival. RESULTS Between 2011 and 2019, 300 patients were randomly assigned (IG-IMRT 151 and 3D-CRT 149). At a median follow-up of 46 (interquartile range 20-72) months, the 3-year cumulative incidence of grade ≥ 2 late GI toxicity in the IG-IMRT and 3D-CRT arms were 21.1% versus 42.4% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.73; P < .001). The cumulative incidence of grade ≥ 2 any late toxicity was 28.1% versus 48.9% (HR 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.76; P < .001), respectively. Patients reported reduced diarrhea ( P = .04), improved appetite ( P = .008), and lesser bowel symptoms ( P = .002) with IG-IMRT. However, no difference was observed in the time by treatment interaction. The 3-year pelvic relapse-free survival and disease-free survival in the IG-IMRT versus the 3D-CRT arm were 81.8% versus 84% (HR 1.17; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.99; P = .55) and 76.9% versus 81.2% (HR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.71; P = .89), respectively. CONCLUSION IG-IMRT results in reduced toxicity with no difference in disease outcomes.

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00193791.

Background: Overburdened systems and concerns of adverse outcomes have resulted in deferred cancer surgeries with devastating consequences. In this COVID pandemic, the decision to continue elective cancer surgeries, and their subsequent outcomes, are sparsely reported from hotspots. Methods: A prospective database of the Department of Surgical Oncology was analysed from March 23rd to April 30th, 2020. Findings: Four hundred ninety-four elective surgeries were performed (377 untested and 117 tested for Covid 19 before surgery). Median age was 48 years with 13% (n ¼ 64) above the age of 60 years. Sixty-eight percent patients were American Society of Anaesthesiology (ASA) grade I. As per surgical complexity grading, 71 (14Á4%) cases were lower grade (I-III) and 423 (85.6%) were higher grade complex surgeries (IV-VI). Clavien-Dindo ! grade III complications were 5.6% (n ¼ 28) and there were no postoperative deaths. Patients >60 years documented 9.3% major complications compared to 5.2% in <60 years (P ¼ 0.169). The median hospital stay was 1 to 9 days across specialties. Postoperatively, 26 patients were tested for COVID 19 and 6 tested positive. They all had higher grade surgeries but none required escalated or intensive care treatment related to COVID infection. Interpretation: A combination of scientific and administrative rationale contributed to favorable outcomes after major elective cancer surgeries. These results support the continuation of elective major cancer surgery in regions with Covid 19 trends similar to India.

No abstract

No abstract