Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncology screenings: it is time to change course

Early-stage cervical cancer treatment - what's new?

The gold standard of treatment for patients with early-stage cervical cancer is radical hysterectomy, in agreement with the entire scientific community. During the last decade, growing evidence has supported the minimally invasive approach. Several studies have suggested that the minimally invasive approach could improve surgical and perioperative outcomes. Because of these findings, ESCO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines state that a "minimally invasive approach is favoured" in comparison with open surgery, as a grade B recommendation. Because of the lack of a grade A recommendation, this randomized Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial evaluated open vs. minimally invasive approach in the early stage. It demonstrated an increase in mortality among patients treated with minimally invasive surgery, revolutionizing current thinking on the primary surgical approach to early cervical cancer. The aim of this study is to analyse which is the best treatment for early cervical cancer and which approach is the most effective at the moment. Further studies are needed to state with certainty the appropriateness of the treatments offered to patients with early cervical cancer.

Learning Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy: Are We Facing an Emerging Situation?

Despite wide screening campaigns and early detection, cervical cancer remains the fourth most common cancer among women. Radical hysterectomy, whether by open, laparoscopic or by robotic-assisted techniques, is the mainstay treatment. However, for adequate surgical results and good oncological prognosis, a gynecological surgeon should be trained to perform those procedures. The learning curve of radical hysterectomy, especially by laparoscopy, is influenced by several factors. The LACC trial, the decrease in cervical cancer incidence and radical hysterectomy procedures have widely reduced the learning curve for surgeons. This article mainly discusses the learning curve of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancers, and how several factors are influencing it negatively, with the need to have medical authorities reset specific surgical training programs and allocate them to special oncological centers.

COVID-19 and Pregnancy: Have We Gotten through the Darkest Hour?

On December 2019, a new Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was isolated and identified in Wuhan (China) [...].

COVID-19 outbreak in Lombardy: Impact on reducing solid cancer diagnoses in 2020

Our aim was to analyse, on a population level, the year-long decline in cancer diagnoses in the region of Lombardy (Italy), and to characterise the tumours with the greatest reduction in diagnosis by patient age, sex and tumour stage at diagnosis. We used the health care utilisation databases of the Lombardy region to identify cancer patients' characteristics (eg, sex, age) and cancer-related information (eg, cancer site, stage at diagnosis). The frequency of new cancer diagnoses in 2019 and 2020 were compared in terms of percentage differences in undiagnosed cases. We observed two peaks in the decline in cancer diagnoses: March to May 2020 (-37%) and October to December 2020 (-19%). The decline persisted over the course of 2020 and was higher in males and patients aged 74+. Diagnoses of all four common cancers analysed (female breast, lung, colorectal and prostate) remained below pre-pandemic levels. For breast and colorectal cancers, the decline in diagnoses was high in the age groups targeted by population-based screening programmes. We observed a reduction in localised stage cancer diagnoses for all four cancers. Our data confirm that timely monitoring of cancer diagnoses and interventions to prevent disruption of routine diagnostic services are needed to mitigate the impact of emergencies on cancer patients.

Evaluation of Surgical Outcomes of Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy and Total Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis of Data Collected before the LACC Trial

Although a surgical approach is one of the key treatments for stages IA1-IIA2, results of the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) published in 2018 radically changed the field, since minimally invasive surgery was associated with a four-fold higher rate of recurrence and a six-fold higher rate of all-cause death compared to an open approach. We aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes of abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) and total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) for cervical cancer, including data collected before the LACC trial. In our retrospective analysis, operative time was significantly longer in TLRH compared to ARH (p < 0.0001), although this disadvantage could be considered balanced by lower intra-operative estimated blood loss in TLRH compared with ARH (p < 0.0001). In addition, we did not find significant differences for intra-operative (p = 0.0874) and post-operative complication rates (p = 0.0727) between ARH and TLRH. This was not likely to be influenced by age and Body Mass Index, since they were comparable in the two groups (p = 0.0798 and p = 0.4825, respectively). Finally, mean number of pelvic lymph nodes retrieved (p = 0.153) and nodal metastases (p = 0.774), as well as death rate (p = 0.5514) and recurrence rate (p = 0.1582) were comparable between the two groups. Future studies should be aimed at assessing whether different histology/grades of cervical cancer, as well as particular subpopulations, may have significantly different outcomes using minimally invasive surgery or laparotomy, with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

New Advances in Cervical Cancer: From Bench to Bedside

Cervical cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy and the fourth most common cancer in women worldwide. Over the last two decades, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has emerged as the mainstay in the surgical management of early-stage cervical cancer, bringing advantages such as a lower operative morbidity and shorter hospital stay compared to open surgery, while maintaining comparable oncologic outcomes in numerous retrospective studies. Considering oncological patients, it is mandatory to assess the oncological outcomes and safety of this type of surgery. Moreover, there are different future outlooks on cervical cancer therapy, based on immunotherapy, target therapy, and poly-ADP-ribose polymerases (PARP) inhibitors in combination with each other, and in combination with standard chemotherapy and radiotherapy. The goal is to find an approach that is as personalized as possible.

The COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on the Outcome of Medically Assisted Reproduction Pregnancies

Background

The impact of the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on pregnancy is not well-understood. During the outbreak, the initial approach suggested by the major societies was to postpone all non-urgent assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments. Nevertheless, the Italian Society of Fertility and Sterility and Reproductive Medicine considered ethically correct to proceed with ART treatments, as the infertility rate is increasing over time, with a consistent decline in the live birth rate. The objective of our study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the outcomes of ART pregnancies, in terms of early pregnancy loss, overall success rate, and live birth rate.

Methods

We conducted a single-center retro-prospective cohort study. Patients who underwent ART treatments from 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021 (pandemic ART cohort, pART; n = 749) and from 1 March 2019 to 29 February 2020 (control cohort, CTR; n = 844) were enrolled. The study had a duration of 24 months. Patients underwent baseline severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2) nasopharyngeal swab; quantitative serum beta human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) to assess pregnancy; pelvic transvaginal ultrasound; and follow-up until delivery. The study took place at the ART Center of the University Hospital in Florence, Italy.

Results

There were not statistically significant differences on implantation rate (pART 0.348 ± 0.034 vs. CTR 0.365 ± 0.033, CI = 95%, p = 0.49), clinical pregnancy rate (pART 0.847 ± 0.044 vs. CTR 0.864 ± 0.038, CI = 95%, p = 0.56), and ectopic pregnancy rate (pART 0.008 ± 0.011 vs. CTR 0.01 ± 0.011, CI = 95%, p = 0.79). Neither first trimester miscarriage rate was different between the groups (pART 0.224 ± 0.056 vs. CTR 0.213 ± 0.05, CI = 95%, p = 0.77) nor second trimester miscarriage rate (pART 0.018 ± 0.018 vs. CTR 0.019 ± 0.017, CI = 95%, p = 0.95). Live birth rate remained unchanged during the pandemic (pART 0.22 ± 0.03 vs. CTR 0.239 ± 0.029, CI = 95%, p = 0.37) and stable even when compared to our center rate between 2015 and 2019 (pART 0.222 ± 0.03 vs. general rate 0.224 ± 0.014, CI = 95%, p = 0.83).

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic did not cause a statistically significant change in the live birth rate and in the pregnancy loss rate. ART during the COVID-19 pandemic can be considered fair and safe, ethically and medically appropriate. Patients and physicians should be reassured that ART pregnancy outcomes do not seem to be jeopardized by the pandemic state.

Mitochondrial hijacking: A potential mechanism for SARS-CoV-2 to impair female fertility

As well as causing respiratory lesions, the multi-organ complications caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are also well known. Combined with the epidemiological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 with high transmission rate and low lethality, the impact of complications caused by its infection on infected individuals seems to be of greater concern. There has been evidence that viral infection is complicated by female reproductive impairment, but the mechanism by which SARS-CoV-2 impairs female fertility is unclear. In addition, RNA-GPS technology has revealed that the SARS-CoV-2 genome resides in mitochondria of the host cells and affects mitochondrial function. Considering the close relationship between mitochondria and female fertility, this paper takes mitochondrial hijacking as an entry point to elucidate the possible mechanisms by which SARS-CoV-2 affects female fertility through the mitochondrial hijacking pathway, which will be important for timely preventive measures and identification of therapeutic targets for infected women with reproductive needs, especially those with asymptomatic infection.

Pattern of breast cancer presentation during the coronavirus disease pandemic: results from a cohort study in the UK

Background: This study aimed to explore the hypothesis that the stage of breast cancer at initial diagnosis in 2020 is more advanced compared with 2019. Methods: Tumor, node, metastasis and Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) stages of new breast cancer diagnoses at the Bucks Breast Unit from May to October 2019 and 2020 were reviewed. A p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Average UICC stage increased from 1a in 2019 to 2a in 2020 (p < 0.01). Excluding cancers detected through screening, UICC stage still increased from 1b in 2019 to 2a in 2020 (p = 0.0184). There was a significant increase in the percentage of node-positive patients (p = 0.0063) and patients with metastatic disease (p = 0.0295) on initial presentation. Conclusion: Overall, patients presented with higher UICC stages and more node-positive and metastatic disease on initial diagnosis in 2020 compared with 2019.