Objective To explore the trends and age characteristics of vulval cancer incidence, mortality, survival and stage of disease.Design Retrospective population-based observational study based on cancer registry and Office for National Statistics data.Setting England.Population All women diagnosed with vulval cancer, defined by the site of the tumour (ICD-10 code C51).Methods Including all C51 cases, Poisson regression was used to test for trends in incidence and mortality rates, and generalised linear modelling was used to test for trends in relative survival. Excluding women with melanomas, basal cell carcinomas and Paget disease, stage was investigated as a percentage of staged data by age.Main outcome measures Age-standardised incidence and mortality rates, relative survival rates and stage of disease at diagnosis.Results From 1990, there was a statistically significant increase in overall incidence (P = 0.018) and decrease in mortality (P < 0.001). In addition, there were statistically significant increases in overall survival (1-year, P < 0.001; 5-year, P < 0.001). However, from 1990, incidence increased in women aged 20-39 years (P = 0.002), 40-49 and 50-59 years (both P < 0.001) and 60-69 years (P = 0.030) and decreased in women aged 80 years and above (P < 0.001). There were statistically significant decreases in mortality in women aged ≥60 years (P < 0.001), and statistically significant increases in 1-year survival in women aged ≥40 years (P ≤ 0.047) and in 5-year survival in women aged 40-49 and ≥60 years (P ≤ 0.011). Stage patterns by age highlight diagnosis at an earlier stage in younger women and more advanced stage diagnosis in older women.Conclusion Survival from vulval cancer has improved and mortality has decreased since 1990. The overall incidence of disease has increased as a result of more new diagnoses in the under 70-year age group.
Background:There are limited data on surgical outcomes in gynaecological oncology. We report on predictors of complications in a multicentre prospective study.Methods:Data on surgical procedures and resulting complications were contemporaneously recorded on consented patients in 10 participating UK gynaecological cancer centres. Patients were sent follow-up letters to capture any further complications. Post-operative (Post-op) complications were graded (I–V) in increasing severity using the Clavien-Dindo system. Grade I complications were excluded from the analysis. Univariable and multivariable regression was used to identify predictors of complications using all surgery for intra-operative (Intra-op) and only those with both hospital and patient-reported data for Post-op complications.Results:Prospective data were available on 2948 major operations undertaken between April 2010 and February 2012. Median age was 62 years, with 35% obese and 20.4% ASA grade ⩾3. Consultant gynaecological oncologists performed 74.3% of operations. Intra-op complications were reported in 139 of 2948 and Grade II–V Post-op complications in 379 of 1462 surgeries. The predictors of risk were different for Intra-op and Post-op complications. For Intra-op complications, previous abdominal surgery, metabolic/endocrine disorders (excluding diabetes), surgical complexity and final diagnosis were significant in univariable and multivariable regression (P<0.05), with diabetes only in multivariable regression (P=0.006). For Post-op complications, age, comorbidity status, diabetes, surgical approach, duration of surgery, and final diagnosis were significant in both univariable and multivariable regression (P<0.05).Conclusions:This multicentre prospective audit benchmarks the considerable morbidity associated with gynaecological oncology surgery. There are significant patient and surgical factors that influence this risk.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.