Cancer diagnosis and treatment in pregnant women is a challenging situation. A multidisciplinary network of specialists is required to guide both, the expecting mother and the unborn child through the diagnostic workup and the cytotoxic therapy, by balancing the respective risks and benefits. Tumor entity, stage, biology and gestational week at diagnosis determine the appropriate approach. As premature delivery emerged as one of the main risk factors for adverse long-term outcome of the progeny, it should be avoided, if reasonable from the oncological perspective. This article offers a comprehensive review with respect to the various aspects of cancer in pregnancy.

Background Endometriosis is a chronic pain condition in premenopausal women. Pain is mainly characterized by pain intensity and may induce disability in all areas of daily life. Nevertheless, pain is influenced by emotional and social factors as well. Social distancing measures or quarantine, as reaction to rapidly rising infections with the COVID-19 virus due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, were implemented across Europe to prevent the spread of the virus and social distancing measures were imposed by the German government by beginning of March 2020 with initiation of the lockdown by the end of March 2020. The objective of this study was to assess, how social distancing measures during the lockdown impacted the various aspects of pain perception in a group of chronic pain patients, such as women suffering from endometriosis. Methods Between 6th to 27th April 2020, an online questionnaire was activated at internet platforms of endometriosis patients support groups. Participants were asked retrospectively at one time point about their visual pain intensity measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS) and pain disability via pain disability index (PDI) prior to initiation of social distancing measures in Germany (VASP, PDIP), as well as the pain intensity and pain disability since implementation of social distancing measures (VASI, PDII). Differences of VAS and PDI previous and after implementation of social distancing measures were displayed as ΔVAS and ΔPDI. Pain experience and social support were assessed by a 5-point Likert scale. Results 285 participants completed at least one question regarding pain intensity, disability, pain experience or social support. Dysmenorrhea, the symptom with the highest level of pain assessed by VAS, decreased significantly during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic compared to the time period prior to social isolation (45.30% respondents experienced improvemenet vs 40.50% who experienced worsening; p = 0.025). The global physical impairment improved significantly (improvement of pain induced disability in 48.20% vs 40.90% with worsening of pain symptoms; p = 0.032) after the implementation of social distancing measures. Pain experience was negatively affected by social distancing measures, since frequency of pain awareness increased in 43.6% (p<0.001) of participants and 30.0% (p<0.001) more participants experienced pain as a threat. Verbalization of pain experience was reduced in 36.6% (p = 0.001) of participants and 14.6% (p = 0.91), 21.9% (p<0.001) and 31.5% (p<0.001) of participants reported less social support from their partner, family and friends. Conclusions Physical pain and disability on one hand and emotional and social pain experience on the other were differentially affected by the emerged emotional, social and health care constraints related to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

<b><i>Background:</i></b> We evaluated the prognostic impact of various global health assessment tools in patients older than 60 years with ovarian cancer (OC). <b><i>Methods:</i></b> G-8 geriatric screening tool (G-8 score), Lee Schonberg prognostic index, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were determined retrospectively in a consecutive cohort of elderly patients with OC. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses and Kaplan-Meier method were performed to analyze the impact of the preoperative global health status on survival. <b><i>Results:</i></b> 116 patients entered the study. In multivariate analysis adjusted for clinical-pathological factors, only the G-8 score retained significance as a prognostic parameter of progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.970; 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.056–3.677]; <i>p</i> = 0.033). Fifty-six patients were classified as G-8-nonfrail with an increased PFS compared to 50 G-8-frail patients (53.4% vs. 16.7%; <i>p</i> = 0.010). A higher CCI was associated with decreased PFS (45.1% vs. 22.2%; <i>p</i> = 0.012), but it did not influence the risk of recurrences or death (<i>p</i> = 0.360; <i>p</i> = 0.111). The Lee Schonberg prognostic index, the ECOG, and age were not associated with survival. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The G-8 score independently predicted PFS in elderly OC patients regardless of maximal surgical effort. Thus, it could be useful to assess surgical treatment based on frailty rather than age alone.

Background: Intermittent fasting (IF) is defined as an eating pattern without calorie restrictions, alternating between periods of fasting and eating. In the past decades IF has not only become a popular weight-reducing diet but is thought to improve Quality of Life (QoL) and fatigue. However, very little evidence exists for the general population. Thus, we aimed to assess the impact of a 16-h fasting period per day over a three-month study period on QoL and especially fatigue in healthy people. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study including healthy subjects. All participants fasted 16 h for at least five days a week while maintaining their normal lifestyle. In the study, we analysed blood samples as well as QoL through standardized questionnaires (WHO-5 questionnaire, Short Form Health 36). Furthermore, we measured the degree of fatigue with the Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAS) and Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) as well as compliance, activity records, and weight alterations. All endpoints were evaluated at baseline, after two weeks, four weeks, and three months of IF. Results: A total of 30 participants fasted for the entire study period. The results of the WHO-5 questionnaire (15.6 ± 4.6 vs. 18 ± 3.6, p < 0.0019) demonstrated a significant increase in QoL. For long-term QoL six out of eight domains measured by the Short Form Health 36 (SF-36) significantly improved (e.g., physical health: 92.3 ± 11.6 vs. 96.5 ± 6.3, p = 0.015; mental health: 75.5 ± 12.0 vs. 81.7 ± 9.0; p < 0.001 and body pain: 74.1 ± 31.8 vs. 89.5 ± 14.9; p = 0.008) after three months. Fatigue significantly decreased from 10.3 ± 3.2 to 8.4 ± 2.5; p = 0.002 for mental fatigue and from 12.6 ± 3.8 to 10.7 ± 3.3; p = 0.002 measured by the FAS. The mean FSS-Score at baseline was 3.5 ± 1.2 compared to 2.9 ± 1.1 (scale 1–7) after three months (p < 0.001). Notably, the proliferation marker IGF-1 was significantly reduced. No clinically significant changes in laboratory parameters were observed that would have endangered a participant’s safety. Conclusions: IF according to the 16:8 regime over a fasting period of three months significantly improved several aspects of the QoL and decreased fatigue in healthy people, while maintaining a good safety profile. The practicability of this diet was also demonstrated for shift workers and people with a high percentage of active labour. Apart from the improvement in QoL and fatigue, the significant reduction in IGF-1, which can act as an accelerator of tumour development and progression, might be an indicator of the potential benefits of IF for patients with cancer.

Background: Endometriosis is a multifaceted chronic pain condition that can have a negative impact on mental health. Patients suffering from chronic pain may face an additional psychological burden during adversity, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The main aim of this research was to evaluate the prevalence of self-reported depression and anxiety, the influence of demographic, endometriosis-specific, pandemic-specific factors, and resilience on mental health outcomes of patients with endometriosis. Methods: An online survey was conducted through patient support groups of women suffering from endometriosis during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The PHQ-4 questionnaire, which combines two items of the Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression (PHQ-2) and two items from the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-2) was used to assess self-reported mental health. The Brief Resilience Score (BRS) was employed to evaluate resilience. Independent risk and protective factors for mental health were investigated by multivariate logistic regression analyses. Results: The PHQ-4 questionnaire was completed by 274 respondents. More than 40% reached depression (PHQ-2) and anxiety (GAD-2) scores of ≥3, and more than 20% achieved PHQ-2 and GAD-2 scores of ≥5. High resilience was found to be a reliable and strong independent protector for the probability of developing adverse psychological outcomes: OR 0.295, p < 0.001 for developing generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-2 ≥ 3), and OR 0.467, p < 0.001 for having major depression (PHQ-2 ≥ 3). Conclusions: Pain-induced disability is an independent risk factor for developing major depression and anxiety, while resilience was identified as a potential protective parameter in terms of positive psychological outcomes in women with endometriosis. The results of this study may help to identify women at risk for adverse mental health outcomes and should encourage healthcare practitioners to establish strategies for the reduction of negative psychological and psychiatric impacts on patients with endometriosis.