Participation of Lower and Upper Middle-Income Countries in Clinical Trials Led by High-Income Countries.

Importance: Many randomized clinical trials (RCTs) led by high-income countries (HICs) now enroll patients from lower middle-income countries (LMICs) and upper middle-income countries (UMICs). Although enrolling diverse populations promotes research collaborations, there are issues regarding which countries participate in RCTs and how this participation may contribute to global research. Objective: To describe which UMICs and LMICs participate in RCTs led by HICs. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study of all oncology RCTs published globally during January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2017, was conducted. The study cohort was restricted to RCTs led by HICs that enrolled participants from LMICs and UMICs. Study analyses were conducted in November 1, 2021, to May 31, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: A bibliometric approach (Web of Science 2007-2017) was used to explore whether RCT participation was proportional to other measures of cancer research activity. Participation in RCTs (ie, percentage of RCTs in the cohort in which each LMIC and UMIC participated) was compared with country-level cancer research bibliometric output (ie, percentage of total cancer research bibliometric output from the same group of countries that came from a specific LMIC and UMIC). Results: Among the 636 HIC-led RCTs, 186 trials (29%) enrolled patients in LMICs (n = 84 trials involving 11 LMICs) and/or UMICs (n = 181 trials involving 26 UMICs). The most common participating LMICs were India (42 [50%]), Ukraine (39 [46%]), Philippines (23 [27%]), and Egypt (12 [14%]). The most common participating UMICs were Russia (115 [64%]), Brazil (94 [52%]), Romania (62 [34%]), China (56 [31%]), Mexico (56 [31%]), and South Africa (54 [30%]). Several LMICs are overrepresented in the cohort of RCTs based on proportional cancer research bibliometric output: Ukraine (46% of RCTs but 2% of cancer research bibliometric output), Philippines (27% RCTs, 1% output), and Georgia (8% RCTs, 0.2% output). Overrepresented UMICs include Russia (64% RCTs, 2% output), Romania (34% RCTs, 2% output), Mexico (31% RCTs, 2% output), and South Africa (30% RCTs, 1% output). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, a substantial proportion of RCTs led by HICs enrolled patients in LMICs and UMICs. The LMICs and UMICs that participated in these trials did not match overall cancer bibliometric output as a surrogate for research ecosystem maturity. Reasons for this apparent discordance and how these data may inform future capacity-strengthening activities require further study.

Cancer risk-reducing surgery: Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology Guideline Part 2 (Gastrointestinal and thyroid).

BACKGROUND: Risk-reducing operations are an important part of the management of hereditary predisposition to cancer. In selected cases, they can considerably reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with cancer in this population. OBJECTIVES: The Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (BSSO) developed this guideline to establish national benchmarks for cancer risk-reducing operations. METHODS: The guideline was prepared from May to December 2021 by a multidisciplinary team of experts to discuss the surgical management of cancer predisposition syndromes. Eleven questions were defined and assigned to expert groups that reviewed the literature and drafted preliminary recommendations. Following a review by the coordinators and a second review by all participants, the groups made final adjustments, classified the level of evidence, and voted on the recommendations. RESULTS: For all questions including risk-reducing colectomy, gastrectomy, and thyroidectomy, a major agreement was achieved by the participants, always using accessible alternatives. CONCLUSION: This and its accompanying article represent the first guideline in cancer risk reduction surgery developed by the BSSO and it should serve as an important reference for the management of families with cancer predisposition.

ConCerv: a prospective trial of conservative surgery for low-risk early-stage cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the ConCerv Trial was to prospectively evaluate the feasibility of conservative surgery in women with early-stage, low-risk cervical cancer. METHODS: From April 2010 to March 2019, a prospective, single-arm, multicenter study evaluated conservative surgery in participants from 16 sites in nine countries. Eligibility criteria included: (1) FIGO 2009 stage IA2-IB1 cervical carcinoma; (2) squamous cell (any grade) or adenocarcinoma (grade 1 or 2 only) histology; (3) tumor size <2 cm; (4) no lymphovascular space invasion; (5) depth of invasion <10 mm; (6) negative imaging for metastatic disease; and (7) negative conization margins. Cervical conization was performed to determine eligibility, with one repeat cone permitted. Eligible women desiring fertility preservation underwent a second surgery with pelvic lymph node assessment, consisting of sentinel lymph node biopsy and/or full pelvic lymph node dissection. Those not desiring fertility preservation underwent simple hysterectomy with lymph node assessment. Women who had undergone an 'inadvertent' simple hysterectomy with an unexpected post-operative diagnosis of cancer were also eligible if they met the above inclusion criteria and underwent a second surgery with pelvic lymph node dissection only. RESULTS: 100 evaluable patients were enrolled. Median age at surgery was 38 years (range 23-67). Stage was IA2 (33%) and IB1 (67%). Surgery included conization followed by lymph node assessment in 44 women, conization followed by simple hysterectomy with lymph node assessment in 40 women, and inadvertent simple hysterectomy followed by lymph node dissection in 16 women. Positive lymph nodes were noted in 5 patients (5%). Residual disease in the post-conization hysterectomy specimen was noted in 1/40 patients-that is, an immediate failure rate of 2.5%. Median follow-up was 36.3 months (range 0.0-68.3). Three patients developed recurrent disease within 2 years of surgery-that is, a cumulative incidence of 3.5% (95% CI 0.9% to 9.0%). DISCUSSION: Our prospective data show that select patients with early-stage, low-risk cervical carcinoma may be offered conservative surgery.

Early removal of indwelling urinary catheter after radical surgery for early-stage cervical cancer-A cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the difference between early and delayed removal of indwelling urinary catheter after radical hysterectomy (RH) or radical trachelectomy (RT). METHODS: An ambispective study was conducted in early-stage cervical cancer patients who underwent RH or RT. Delayed indwelling urinary catheter removal occurred on a postoperative day (POD) 7 in the retrospective group (January 2012-November 2013), and early removal occurred on POD 1 in the prospective group (May 2014-June 2017). The postvoid residual (PVR) test was performed after indwelling catheter removal in both groups. RESULTS: Our sample included 47 patients in the delayed group and 48 in the early one. There was no difference in age, body mass index, tumor size, histology, stage, surgical approach, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Indwelling urinary catheter reinsertion was needed in 16 (34%) patients in the delayed group and 12 (25%) in the early group (P = .37), with no statistical difference between the median PVR volumes -82.5 and 45 mL (P = .06), respectively. Seven (14.9%) patients in the delayed group presented with 30-day urinary tract infection vs two (4.2%) in the early group (P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Early indwelling urinary catheter removal, in regard to the rate of catheter reinsertion and PVR volume, does not differ from delayed removal.

Health system strengthening: Integration of breast cancer care for improved outcomes.

The adoption of the goal of universal health coverage and the growing burden of cancer in low- and middle-income countries makes it important to consider how to provide cancer care. Specific interventions can strengthen health systems while providing cancer care within a resource-stratified perspective (similar to the World Health Organization-tiered approach). Four specific topics are discussed: essential medicines/essential diagnostics lists; national cancer plans; provision of affordable essential public services (either at no cost to users or through national health insurance); and finally, how a nascent breast cancer program can build on existing programs. A case study of Zambia (a country with a core level of resources for cancer care, using the Breast Health Global Initiative typology) shows how a breast cancer program was built on a cervical cancer program, which in turn had evolved from the HIV/AIDS program. A case study of Brazil (which has enhanced resources for cancer care) describes how access to breast cancer care evolved as universal health coverage expanded. A case study of Uruguay shows how breast cancer outcomes improved as the country shifted from a largely private system to a single-payer national health insurance system in the transition to becoming a country with maximal resources for cancer care. The final case study describes an exciting initiative, the City Cancer Challenge, and how that may lead to improved cancer services.

Uterine transposition technique: update and review.

This review concerns the uterine transposition technique for preserving fertility in patients who require pelvic radiotherapy. Uterine transposition was developed from adapting well-established surgical techniques with the goal of keeping the uterus and adnexa outside the radiotherapy field in order to preserve their function. The uterine transposition technique is presented step by step, with discussion of the literature that served as the basis for the technique's development. Its most recent modifications, resulting from the authors' experience, are also presented. Technical details relating to possible complications and their implications are also discussed. The uterine transposition technique is evolving. Although its basics are defined, the need for improvement remains. The results of the technique are pending and require further study.

Global cancer surgery: delivering safe, affordable, and timely cancer surgery.

Surgery is essential for global cancer care in all resource settings. Of the 15.2 million new cases of cancer in 2015, over 80% of cases will need surgery, some several times. By 2030, we estimate that annually 45 million surgical procedures will be needed worldwide. Yet, less than 25% of patients with cancer worldwide actually get safe, affordable, or timely surgery. This Commission on global cancer surgery, building on Global Surgery 2030, has examined the state of global cancer surgery through an analysis of the burden of surgical disease and breadth of cancer surgery, economics and financing, factors for strengthening surgical systems for cancer with multiple-country studies, the research agenda, and the political factors that frame policy making in this area. We found wide equity and economic gaps in global cancer surgery. Many patients throughout the world do not have access to cancer surgery, and the failure to train more cancer surgeons and strengthen systems could result in as much as US $6.2 trillion in lost cumulative gross domestic product by 2030. Many of the key adjunct treatment modalities for cancer surgery--e.g., pathology and imaging--are also inadequate. Our analysis identified substantial issues, but also highlights solutions and innovations. Issues of access, a paucity of investment in public surgical systems, low investment in research, and training and education gaps are remarkably widespread. Solutions include better regulated public systems, international partnerships, super-centralisation of surgical services, novel surgical clinical trials, and new approaches to improve quality and scale up cancer surgical systems through education and training. Our key messages are directed at many global stakeholders, but the central message is that to deliver safe, affordable, and timely cancer surgery to all, surgery must be at the heart of global and national cancer control planning.

Lymphovascular Space Invasion Portends Poor Prognosis in Low-Risk Endometrial Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The prognostic significance of lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer is not established. We sought to determine if LVSI status in patients with early-stage low-risk endometrial cancer correlates with recurrence and survival. METHODS: The records of all women who underwent hysterectomy for primary treatment of endometrial cancer from January 2006 through January 2011 at 1 academic institution were reviewed. Patients with grade 1 or 2 endometrioid histology, myometrial invasion less than 50%, and disease confined to the uterus (clinical International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology stage IA) were analyzed. Fisher exact test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test were applied to compare patients with and without LVSI. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Two hundred forty patients met the inclusion criteria. Forty (16.7%) had LVSI. Ninety-one patients (37.9%) underwent lymphadenectomy. Median tumor size was 30 mm in patients with and 26 mm in patients without LVSI (P = 0.150). Thirty patients (12.5%) received adjuvant therapy. Site of recurrence did not differ between patients with and without LVSI. Patients with LVSI were more likely to have myometrial invasion (P < 0.001), postoperative pathologic grade 2 disease (P < 0.001), to undergo lymphadenectomy (P = 0.049) and receive adjuvant therapy (P < 0.001). The 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence was 3.8% in the no-LVSI group and 14.2% in the LVSI group (P = 0.053). The presence of LVSI was significantly associated with worse RFS (P = 0.002) and OS (P = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low-risk endometrial cancer and LVSI have worse RFS and OS despite being more likely to undergo lymphadenectomy and adjuvant therapy.

Prognostic scores after surgical treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a proposed model and possible implications for post-operative follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a prognostic model for women who underwent surgical treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. DESIGN: Cohort study. Patient inclusion and follow-up occurred retrospectively and prospectively. SETTING: Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil. POPULATION: Women (n = 242) diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia who were submitted to conization. METHODS: Immediately prior to surgical treatment, a cervical cytology sample was collected from each individual included in the study by endocervical brushing and stored in a preservative solution with methanol. A human papilloma virus-DNA test was conducted using an aliquot of the endocervical brushings. The surgical specimens were subjected to immunohistochemical analysis of p16 (immunohistochemical analysis 4a) protein expression. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two-year disease-free survival rates calculated for each study variable. Identified variables in the multivariate Cox model were used for elaboration of prognostic scores. RESULTS: Variables associated with outcome included age (p = 0.033), tobacco use (p < 0.001), final histopathological diagnosis (p = 0.007), surgical margins (p < 0.001), high-risk human papilloma virus status (p = 0.008), human papilloma virus-16 status (p < 0.001) and immunoexpression of p16 in the cytoplasm (p = 0.049). By the Cox model, independent risk factors for disease recurrence/persistence were: tobacco use (hazard risk = 3.0; 95% confidence interval 1.6-5.6), positive surgical margins (hazard risk = 3.2; 95% confidence interval 1.6-6.1), human papilloma virus-16 (hazard risk = 3.3; 95% confidence interval 1.6-6.9) and age over 45 years (hazard risk = 2.7; 95% confidence interval 1.1-6.6). CONCLUSIONS: Establishment of a prognostic score can represent a valuable tool for determining the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia recurrence after conization. The use of clinical (age and tobacco use), pathological (surgical margins) and molecular (human papilloma virus-16 genotyping) factors can facilitate more appropriate patient follow up according to risk stratification.