Soliman, Pamela T.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Vaginal Cancer outline the recommended diagnostic workup, staging considerations, and treatment options for this rare malignancy. Because vaginal cancer is uncommon and shares many biologic and clinical characteristics with cervical cancer, several management recommendations, particularly systemic therapy, are extrapolated from evidence and practices established for cervical cancer. This guideline excerpt summarizes key components of management, including diagnostic evaluation and workup, principles of staging, pathology considerations, radiation therapy principles, and primary treatment recommendations for both early-stage and advanced disease. It also details approaches to manage relapses, including locoregional recurrence and distant metastases, and provides an in-depth overview of systemic therapy recommendations for vaginal cancer.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Cervical Cancer provide diagnostic workup, staging, and various treatment recommendations for cervical cancer based on clinical and surgical staging. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for cervical cancer specifically focuses on diagnosis and workup, principles of staging and surgery, and primary treatment recommendations for early-stage and advanced disease and provides a detailed overview of systemic therapy recommendations for cervical cancer.

The NCCN Guidelines for Uterine Neoplasms provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, clinical staging, and treatment options for patients with endometrial cancer and uterine sarcoma. The NCCN Cervical Uterine Panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions; examine relevant new data from publications, abstracts, and recent FDA approvals; and reevaluate and update recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s deliberations on the new FIGO 2023 staging system and updates on the new systemic therapy recommendations for the management of endometrial cancer.

Vulvar cancer is annually diagnosed in an estimated 6,470 individuals and the vast majority are histologically squamous cell carcinomas. Vulvar cancer accounts for 5% to 8% of gynecologic malignancies. Known risk factors for vulvar cancer include increasing age, infection with human papillomavirus, cigarette smoking, inflammatory conditions affecting the vulva, and immunodeficiency. Most vulvar neoplasias are diagnosed at early stages. Rarer histologies exist and include melanoma, extramammary Paget’s disease, Bartholin gland adenocarcinoma, verrucous carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma, and sarcoma. This manuscript discusses recommendations outlined in the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for treatments, surveillance, systemic therapy options, and gynecologic survivorship.

The NCCN Guidelines for Cervical Cancer provide recommendations for all aspects of management for cervical cancer, including the diagnostic workup, staging, pathology, and treatment. The guidelines also include details on histopathologic classification of cervical cancer regarding diagnostic features, molecular profiles, and clinical outcomes. The treatment landscape of advanced cervical cancer is evolving constantly. These NCCN Guidelines Insights provide a summary of recent updates regarding the systemic therapy recommendations for recurrent or metastatic disease.

Adenocarcinoma of the endometrium (also known as endometrial cancer, or more broadly as uterine cancer or carcinoma of the uterine corpus) is the most common malignancy of the female genital tract in the United States. It is estimated that 65,950 new uterine cancer cases will have occurred in 2022, with 12,550 deaths resulting from the disease. Endometrial carcinoma includes pure endometrioid cancer and carcinomas with high-risk endometrial histology (including uterine serous carcinoma, clear cell carcinoma, carcinosarcoma [also known as malignant mixed Müllerian tumor], and undifferentiated/dedifferentiated carcinoma). Stromal or mesenchymal sarcomas are uncommon subtypes accounting for approximately 3% of all uterine cancers. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Uterine Neoplasms focuses on the diagnosis, staging, and management of pure endometrioid carcinoma. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Uterine Neoplasms is available online at NCCN.org .

The NCCN Guidelines for Uterine Neoplasms provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, clinical staging, and treatment options for patients with endometrial cancer or uterine sarcoma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the recent addition of molecular profiling information to aid in accurate diagnosis, classification, and treatment of uterine sarcomas.

5517 Background: Uterine serous carcinoma is a less common subtype of endometrial cancer that is associated with poorer survival. The optimal post-operative adjuvant treatment strategy for these patients remains uncertain. Methods: This multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study evaluated patients with early stage uterine serous carcinoma. Patients with FIGO Stage IA-II disease after surgery, whose tumors had serous or mixed serous/non-serous histology were included. Patients with carcinosarcoma were excluded. Clinical data were abstracted from local medical records. Summary statistics, Fisher’s exact, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to analyze demographic and clinical characteristics. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed for recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: 634 patients were included. 77% of patients had Stage IA disease, 42% showed no myometrial invasion. The majority had pure serous histology (72%) and LVSI (76%). Adjuvant treatment varied: 12% received no adjuvant therapy, 7% had chemotherapy alone, 51% had cuff brachytherapy, 12% had cuff brachytherapy with chemotherapy (cuff/chemo), and 19% underwent pelvic radiation (EBRT). Complete RFS and OS data were available for 607 and 609 patients, respectively, and the median follow-up time was 58 months. As compared with patients who received no adjuvant therapy, patients who received cuff or cuff/chemo had improved RFS (cuff: HR 0.70, p = 0.02; cuff/chemo HR 0.53, p = 0.01) and OS (cuff HR 0.56, p = 0.001; cuff/chemo HR 0.48, p = 0.01). In a direct comparison, patients with cuff/chemo had better RFS and OS than those with chemotherapy alone (RFS HR 0.52, p = 0.03; OS HR 0.50, p = 0.05). There were no differences in RFS or OS for women who received chemotherapy alone or EBRT. Improved survival with cuff and cuff/chemo persisted on multivariable analyses (included age, stage, LVSI, adjuvant therapy type); additionally, EBRT was also associated with improved OS. In analyses limited to patients without myometrial invasion, patients with cuff or cuff/chemo had improved RFS and OS compared with observation alone. Conclusions: The use of adjuvant cuff brachytherapy with and without chemotherapy was associated with improved RFS and OS in patients with early stage uterine serous carcinoma.

10 Background: Our objective was to evaluate the cost-utility of 3 lymphadenectomy (LND) strategies in the treatment of low-risk endometrial cancer (EC). Methods: A decision analysis model compared 3 LND strategies in women undergoing minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for EC: 1) routine LND in all pts; 2) selective LND based on intraoperative frozen section, in which 60% of pts undergo LND; and 3) sentinel lymph node mapping (SLN) based on a published algorithm, in which 15% of pts map unilaterally (requiring a contralateral LND) and 5% don’t map (requiring bilateral LND). Costs and outcomes were obtained from published literature and Medicare reimbursement rates. Costs categories consisted of hospital, physician, operating room, pathology, and lymphedema treatment. Effectiveness was defined as 3-year disease-specific survival adjusted for the impact of lymphedema (utility = 0.8) on quality of life. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained were calculated. QALYs and costs were discounted at an annual 3% rate. Results: For the estimated 40,000 women undergoing surgery for low-risk EC each year in the US, the annual cost of routine LND, selective LND, and SLN is $722 million, $681 million, and $656 million respectively. In the base case scenario, routine LND had a cost of $18,041 and an effectiveness of 2.79 QALYs. Selective LND had a cost of $17,036 and an effectiveness of 2.81 QALYs, while SLN had a cost of $16,401 and an effectiveness of 2.87 QALYs. With a difference of $1,005 and 0.02 QALYs, selective LND was both less costly and more effective than routine LND, dominating it. However, with the lowest cost and highest effectiveness, SLN dominated the other modalities and was the most cost-effective strategy. No ICER could be determined. These findings were robust to multiple one- and two-way sensitivity analyses varying the rates of lymphedema and LND, surgical approach (open or MIS), lymphedema utility, and costs. Conclusions: Compared to routine and selective LND, SLN had the lowest cost and highest quality-adjusted survival, making it the most cost-effective strategy in the management of low-risk EC.