Cervix Flashcards
(42 cards)
Type II vs Type III hysterectomy
Type II:
- Ligate uterine artery medial to the ureter
- Take the parametria halfway to the sidewall
- Take half the uterosacral ligaments
- Take 1-2cm of vagina
Type III:
- Ligate uterine artery at its origin
- Take parametria at the sidewall
- Take uterosacral ligaments at the sacrum
- Take 2-3cm of vagina
HPV types
16 and 18: 70% of cervical cancers
31, 33, 45, 52, and 58: 20% of cancers
6 and 11: 90% of warts
*These 9 make up Gardasil 9.
HPV vaccine
Who: Recommended at age 11-12.
Can be given 9-26.
Decision to give after age 26 must be individualized.
Approved in the US unto age 45.
Dose:
Age < 15: 0 and 6-12 months
Age > 15: 0, 2, and 6 months
Rate of ovarian mets?
SCC: 0.5%
Adenoca: 1.7%
MRI vs CT for cervical cancer staging?
Bipat et al, 2003 Systematic review MRI more sensitive than CT for LAD and parametrial involvement. - 74% sensitivity for parametria - 60% sensitivity for LAD
PET scan for cervical cancer?
Havrilesky et al, 2005 Systematic review for cervical and ovarian Sensitivity and Specificity: - Pelvic LN 79 / 99% - PALN 84 / 95%
Stage IA1, negative LVSI
Treatment options?
1) Fertility-sparing: CKC
- Roman 1997: risk of residual invasion 3% with negative margins, upto 33% with positive margins AND positive ECC
- risk of LN mets < 1%
- Wright et al 2010: SEER study, 1400 patients who had cone or hysterectomy, no difference in 5yr survival
2) Non-fertility sparing: Simple hyst
Stage IA1 with LVSI, or
Stage IA2
1) Fertility-sparing:
- CKC with pelvic LND
- radical trachelectomy with pelvic LND
2) Non-fertility sparing:
- radical hysterectomy with pelvic LND
- RT
Stage IB1 (less than 2cm)
1) Fertility-sparing:
- radical trachelectomy with pelvic LND
* if other criteria are met
2) Non-fertility sparing:
- radical hysterectomy with pelvic LND
- chemoRT
Stage IB2 (2-4cm), or IIA1 (upper 2/3 of vagina, less than 4cm)
- radical hysterectomy with pelvic LND
- chemoRT
Stage IB3 (>4cm), or above
chemoRT
Are surgery and RT equivalent?
Landoni 1997:
Stage IB1, IB2, IIA
randomized to RH or RT
RH patients got postop RT if +margins / parametria, LN, or 3mm margin
- No difference in PFS, thus equivalent oncologic outcomes
- Criticisms:
Many RH patients got RT
Less dose to point A
83% of RH patients got RT
Complications of rad hysterectomy?
Bladder atony Lymphocyst Ureterovaginal fistula Thrombophlebitis PE SBO
Complications of radiation?
Sigmoiditis RV fistula VV fistula Rectal stricture Ureteral stricture SBO
Prognostic pathologic factors for recurrence in cervical cancer?
GOG 49:
Size
LVSI
DOI
These increase the risk of recurrence from 2 to 31%
Criteria for radical trachelectomy?
Age < 40 No infertility issues known size < 2cm (new IB1) PET negative for LN disease Upper endocervix negative Squamous, adeno, or adenosquamous
Preoperative counseling for radical trachelectomy?
- That patient may need hysterectomy (for example, if unable to get margin or there is upper cervical extension)
- That patient may need RT based on final pathology
Data to support trachelectomy?
1) Oncologic outcomes?
2) Pregnancy outcomes?
1) Multiple observational studies suggest equal oncologic outcomes. MSKCC case-control study by Diaz.
2) Boss 2005, systematic review of 16 studies and 355 patients. 153 tried to get pregnant. Of these:
- 70% pregnancy rate
- 49% term deliveries
Pathologic risk factors for +pelvic LN?
GOG 49:
a. Depth of stromal invasion (superficial 4% vs deep 26%)
b. Gross primary tumor (occult 9% vs gross 21%)
c. LVSI (8% vs 25%)
d. Grade (G1 10%, G2 14%, G3 22%)
e. Parametrial extension (Negative 13% vs Positive 43%)
Why do you perform open surgery for cervical cancer?
LACC trial
- randomized, noninferiority trial; stage IA1(LVSI+), IA2, IB1
- 92% = IB1
- 16% robotic
- 3 yr DFS: 91% vs 97%
- 3 yr OS: 94% vs 99%, HR for death = 6,
Conclusion: MIS rad hyst had lower DFS and OS vs open rad host
In addition, retrospective data has shown that the mortality rate was stable prior to the adoption of MIS for cervical cancer
Would you perform adjuvant hysterectomy after RT?
GOG 71, Keys et al 2003 Randomized trial Bulky IB tumors RT+intracavitary vs RT+RH No difference in PFS or OS. Authors concluded that adjuvant RH had no benefit except maybe in very large tumors.
I would only consider in patients with residual disease after RT.
Why do you give primary chemoRT to your bulky stage IB+ patients?
GOG 123, Keys et al 1999 Randomized trial Bulky IB2 RT+RH vs cisRT+RH Improved outcomes with cis! -3yr PFS 63 vs 79% -3yr OS 74 vs 83%
*The additional information provided by GOG 71 makes it such that adjuvant hyst can be omitted.
How did cisplatinum come to have a major role in treatment of cervical cancer?
1999 NCI Alert: Three randomized GOG trials showed benefit with cis over other regimens.
GOG 85: cis/5FU+RT > HU+RT
GOG 120: cisRT vs cis/5FU/HU-RT vs HU-RT. Both cis groups > HU
GOG 123: cisRT+RH > RT+RH
What is the rate of PALN involvement?
Depends on clinical stage: I = 7% II = 18% III = 27% IV = 33%