Clinical trials in gynecologic oncology: Past, present, and future

Oncofertility Research: A Review of the Literature

Objective: To examine publication trends pertaining to fertility-sparing management in patients of reproductive age with gynecological malignancies. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE was used to aggregate all publications on gynecological cancers and fertility between 1946 and 2022. Original research, reviews, case series/reports, and editorials were included. Publication information was extracted from Ovid MEDLINE. Individual authors' subspecialty credentials were individually reviewed and confirmed. Descriptive statistics were generated. Results: The initial query generated 2,057 publications. Of these, 1,057 (51.4%) publications met search criteria, with the first study being published in 1991 and with 16.6% published in the last 2 years. Only 34 (5.5%) studies were published with collaboration between reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) and gynecological oncology physicians in the United States. Gynecological oncologists comprised most senior authors (50.9%), followed by REI specialists (18.6%). Topics of the publications centered on fertility-sparing surgical management (43.1%), medical management of gynecological malignancies (11.3%), and oocyte/ovarian tissue preservation (6.0%). Most publications focused on ovarian malignancies (349, 33.3%), followed by cervical cancer (299, 28.5%), and uterine/endometrial cancer (258, 24.6%). While the number of publications regarding fertility-sparing management has increased over the last 30 years, the majority are retrospective studies and case reports/series. In the last 10 years, only five studies were randomized controlled trials. Conclusions: There is an urgent need for more prospective research in oncofertility. While fertility care in the setting of gynecological cancer is a collaborative effort between the specialties of gynecological oncology and REI, this partnership is not reflected in the authorship of current literature.

Shifting trends and sicker patients: Reassessing hysterectomy performed for benign indications by gynecologic oncologists

OBJECTIVE

To assess trends and differences in patient characteristics, complications, and distributions of hysterectomy for benign indications by benign gynecologists (BG) and gynecologic oncologists (GO).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study identified patients undergoing hysterectomy for benign indications using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data from 2014 to 2021. Exclusions were made for gynecologic or disseminated cancers, ascites, non-gynecologic surgeons, and cesarean hysterectomies. Primary outcome was major (≥Grade 3) 30-day complications, categorized into any complications, wound, cardiovascular and pulmonary, renal, infectious, andthromboembolic complications. Thirty-day readmissions, reoperations, and mortality were also analyzed. Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 match of GO to BG patients and was compared. Linear regressions assessed trends.

RESULTS

Among 198,767 patients, 18% (n = 37,707) underwent hysterectomy for benign indications with GO. GO patients exhibited more risk factors for complications and differed significantly from BG patients in comorbidities and perioperative characteristics. Overall, GO patients had higher major complication rates (3.1% vs 2.2%, p < 0.001) and for several other composite complications. After matching, compared to BG, GO-performed hysterectomies had similar rates of major complications (3.0% vs 3.0%, p = 0.55) and no differences in other composite complications, except fewer reoperations (1.2 % vs 1.5%, p < 0.01) and wound complications (0.4% vs 0.5%, p = 0.02) in GO patients. Over the eight years, the percentage of GO-performed hysterectomy (β = 0.41, R2 = 0.71,p < 0.01) increased significantly whereas BG-performed surgeries decreased by the same magnitude. BG had a significant decrease in frail patients (β = -0.47, R2 = 0.90, p < 0.01), but GO did not (β = -0.36, R2 = 0.38, p = 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

GO are performing more hysterectomies for benign indications on higher-risk patients. However, on a matched cohort, risks of major complications were similar between GO and BG.

The GOG partners: A program for industry sponsored clinical trials in gynecologic oncology within the GOG foundation

The GOG Foundation, Inc. (GOG-F) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization with the purpose of promoting excellence in the quality and integrity of clinical and basic scientific research in the field of gynecologic malignancies. GOG Partners (GOG-P) is a program of the GOG-F and is positioned alongside NRG Oncology under the GOG-F organizational umbrella. GOG-P operates outside of the federally funded NCI NRG Oncology, a key distinguishing feature. By functioning as a site management organization (SMO), GOG-P provides an additional platform for clinical trial development, mentorship opportunities, patient accrual, and site infrastructure support yielding an expanded gynecologic oncology clinical trials infrastructure in the US. GOG-P has a consistent track record of conducting high quality clinical trials that lead to bringing novel FDA approved treatments for gynecologic cancer. This manuscript summarizes the history and organizational structure of the GOG-P. In addition, we outline the other key supportive programs within the GOG-F that help support the GOG-P effort to perform transformative gynecologic cancer research.

Imaging and therapy of ovarian cancer: clinical application of nanoparticles and future perspectives

Despite significant advances in cancer diagnostics and treatment, ovarian cancers (OC) continue to kill more than 150,000 women every year worldwide. Due to the relatively asymptomatic nature and the advanced stage of the disease at the time of diagnosis, OC is the most lethal gynecologic malignancy. The current treatment for advanced OC relies on the synergistic effect of combining surgical cytoreduction and chemotherapy; however, beside the fact that chemotherapy resistance is a major challenge in OC management, new imaging strategies are needed to target microscopic lesions and improve both cytoreductive surgery and patient outcomes. In this context, nanostructured probes are emerging as a new class of medical tool that can simultaneously provide imaging contrast, target tumor cells, and carry a wide range of medicines resulting in better diagnosis and therapeutic precision. Herein we summarize several exemplary efforts in nanomedicine for addressing unmet clinical needs.