Catherine A Bigelow1, Neil S Horowitz2, Annekathryn Goodman3, Whitfield B Growdon3, Marcela Del Carmen3, Anjali J Kaimal4. 1. Mount Sinai Hospital, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY. Electronic address: catherine.bigelow@mssm.edu. 2. Brigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 3. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Vincent Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 4. Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Vincent Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the third most common gynecologic malignancy in the United States. Approximately 1-3% of cervical cancers will be diagnosed in pregnant and peripartum women; optimal management in the setting of pregnancy is not always clear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe the management of patients with cervical cancer diagnosed in pregnancy and compare their outcomes to nonpregnant women with similar baseline characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients diagnosed with cervical cancer in pregnancy and matched them 1:2 with contemporaneous nonpregnant women of the same age diagnosed with cervical cancer of the same stage. Patients were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes and the Dana-Farber/Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Registry. Data were analyzed using Stata, Version 10.1 (College Station, TX). RESULTS: In all, 28 women diagnosed with cervical cancer during pregnancy were identified from 1997 through 2013. The majority were Stage IB1. In all, 25% (7/28) of women terminated the pregnancy; these women were more likely to be diagnosed earlier in pregnancy (10.9 vs 19.7 weeks, P = .006). For those who did not terminate, mean gestational age at delivery was 36.1 weeks. Pregnancy complications were uncommon. Complication rates in pregnant women undergoing radical hysterectomy were similar to those outside of pregnancy. Time to treatment was significantly longer for pregnant women compared to nonpregnant patients (20.8 vs 7.9 weeks, P = .0014) but there was no survival difference between groups (89.3% vs 95.2%, P = .08). Women who underwent gravid radical hysterectomy had significantly higher estimated blood loss than those who had a radical hysterectomy in the postpartum period (2033 vs 425 mL, P = .0064), but operative characteristics were otherwise similar. None of the pregnant women who died delayed treatment due to pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Gestational age at diagnosis is an important determinant of management of cervical cancer in pregnancy, underscoring the need for expeditious workup of abnormal cervical cytology. Of women who choose to continue the pregnancy, most delivered in the late preterm period without significant obstetric complications. For women undergoing radical hysterectomy in the peripartum period, complication rates are similar to nonpregnant women undergoing this procedure. Women who died were more likely to have advanced stage disease at the time of diagnosis. This information may be useful in counseling women facing the diagnosis of cervical cancer in pregnancy.
BACKGROUND:Cervical cancer is the third most common gynecologic malignancy in the United States. Approximately 1-3% of cervical cancers will be diagnosed in pregnant and peripartum women; optimal management in the setting of pregnancy is not always clear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe the management of patients with cervical cancer diagnosed in pregnancy and compare their outcomes to nonpregnant women with similar baseline characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients diagnosed with cervical cancer in pregnancy and matched them 1:2 with contemporaneous nonpregnant women of the same age diagnosed with cervical cancer of the same stage. Patients were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes and the Dana-Farber/Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Registry. Data were analyzed using Stata, Version 10.1 (College Station, TX). RESULTS: In all, 28 women diagnosed with cervical cancer during pregnancy were identified from 1997 through 2013. The majority were Stage IB1. In all, 25% (7/28) of women terminated the pregnancy; these women were more likely to be diagnosed earlier in pregnancy (10.9 vs 19.7 weeks, P = .006). For those who did not terminate, mean gestational age at delivery was 36.1 weeks. Pregnancy complications were uncommon. Complication rates in pregnant women undergoing radical hysterectomy were similar to those outside of pregnancy. Time to treatment was significantly longer for pregnant women compared to nonpregnant patients (20.8 vs 7.9 weeks, P = .0014) but there was no survival difference between groups (89.3% vs 95.2%, P = .08). Women who underwent gravid radical hysterectomy had significantly higher estimated blood loss than those who had a radical hysterectomy in the postpartum period (2033 vs 425 mL, P = .0064), but operative characteristics were otherwise similar. None of the pregnant women who died delayed treatment due to pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Gestational age at diagnosis is an important determinant of management of cervical cancer in pregnancy, underscoring the need for expeditious workup of abnormal cervical cytology. Of women who choose to continue the pregnancy, most delivered in the late preterm period without significant obstetric complications. For women undergoing radical hysterectomy in the peripartum period, complication rates are similar to nonpregnant women undergoing this procedure. Women who died were more likely to have advanced stage disease at the time of diagnosis. This information may be useful in counseling women facing the diagnosis of cervical cancer in pregnancy.
Authors: Koji Matsuo; Hilary Novatt; Shinya Matsuzaki; Marianne S Hom; Antonio V Castaneda; Ernesto Licon; David J Nusbaum; Lynda D Roman Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2020-05-18 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: James C M Wang; Laurence Bernard; Odette Boutross-Tadross; Sarab Mohamed; Sarah Alghamdi; Amir Salehi; Monalisa Sur; Lorraine Elit; Lua R Eiriksson Journal: Gynecol Oncol Rep Date: 2021-12-21
Authors: Federica Bernardini; Gabriella Ferrandina; Caterina Ricci; Anna Fagotti; Francesco Fanfani; Anna Franca Cavaliere; Benedetta Gui; Giovanni Scambia; Rosa De Vincenzo Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2022-08-14 Impact factor: 3.109