OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of centralisation of care for patients with gynaecological cancer.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2010), MEDLINE, and EMBASE up to November 2010. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, and reference lists of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, controlled before-and-after studies, interrupted time series studies, and observational studies that examined centralisation of services for gynaecological cancer, and used multivariable analysis to adjust for baseline case mix.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently extracted data, and two assessed risk of bias. Where possible, we synthesised the data on survival in a meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS: Five studies met our inclusion criteria; all were retrospective observational studies and therefore at high risk of bias.Meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 9000 women suggested that institutions with gynaecologic oncologists on site may prolong survival in women with ovarian cancer, compared to community or general hospitals: hazard ratio (HR) of death was 0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.99). Similarly, another meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 50,000 women, found that teaching centres or regional cancer centres may prolong survival in women with any gynaecological cancer compared to community or general hospitals (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99). The largest of these studies included all gynaecological malignancies and assessed 48,981 women, so the findings extend beyond ovarian cancer. One study compared community hospitals with semi-specialised gynaecologists versus general hospitals and reported non-significantly better disease-specific survival in women with ovarian cancer (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01). The findings of included studies were highly consistent. Adverse event data were not reported in any of the studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found low quality, but consistent evidence to suggest that women with gynaecological cancer who received treatment in specialised centres had longer survival than those managed elsewhere. The evidence was stronger for ovarian cancer than for other gynaecological cancers.Further studies of survival are needed, with more robust designs than retrospective observational studies. Research should also assess the quality of life associated with centralisation of gynaecological cancer care. Most of the available evidence addresses ovarian cancer in developed countries; future studies should be extended to other gynaecological cancers within different healthcare systems.
METHODS: Information on reproductive characteristics was collected at recruitment. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and multivariable models were adjusted for age and year of diagnosis, body mass index, tumour stage, smoking status and stratified by study centre.
RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 3.6 years (±3.2 s.d.) following EOC diagnosis, 511 (49.9%) of the 1025 women died from EOC. We observed a suggestive survival advantage in menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) users (ever vs never use, HR=0.80, 95% CI=0.62-1.03) and a significant survival benefit in long-term MHT users (⩾5 years use vs never use, HR=0.70, 95% CI=0.50-0.99, P(trend)=0.04). We observed similar results for MHT use when restricting to serous cases. Other reproductive factors, including parity, breastfeeding, oral contraceptive use and age at menarche or menopause, were not associated with EOC-specific mortality risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Further studies are warranted to investigate the possible improvement in EOC survival in MHT users.
METHODS: We selected TF genes within 1 Mb of the top signal at the 12 genome-wide significant risk loci. Mutual information, a form of correlation, was used to build networks of genes strongly coexpressed with each selected TF gene in the unified microarray dataset of 489 serous EOC tumors from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Genes represented in this dataset were subsequently ranked using a gene-level test based on results for germline SNPs from a serous EOC GWAS meta-analysis (2,196 cases/4,396 controls).
RESULTS: Gene set enrichment analysis identified six networks centered on TF genes (HOXB2, HOXB5, HOXB6, HOXB7 at 17q21.32 and HOXD1, HOXD3 at 2q31) that were significantly enriched for genes from the risk-associated end of the ranked list (P < 0.05 and FDR < 0.05). These results were replicated (P < 0.05) using an independent association study (7,035 cases/21,693 controls). Genes underlying enrichment in the six networks were pooled into a combined network.
CONCLUSION: We identified a HOX-centric network associated with serous EOC risk containing several genes with known or emerging roles in serous EOC development.
IMPACT: Network analysis integrating large, context-specific datasets has the potential to offer mechanistic insights into cancer susceptibility and prioritize genes for experimental characterization.
Methods: This was a qualitative study with patients diagnosed with recurrent ovarian cancer and receiving chemotherapy at a hospital gynecologic day-care unit. In-depth individual interviews were conducted with patients to explore how they coped with recurrence of ovarian cancer. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically.
Results: The participants' (n = 10) age range was 52-84 years, the three most common ethnic backgrounds were represented (Malay, Chinese, and Indian), and most of the patients were well educated. All patients were on chemotherapy. Six coping strategies were identified: (1) maintaining a mindset of hopefulness, (2) avoidance of information, (3) accepting their condition, (4) seeking spiritual help, (5) relying on family for support, and (6) coping with financial costs.
Conclusions: Coping strategies employed during ovarian cancer recurrence in this setting were rarely based on the accurate information appraisal, but rather on the individual emotion and personal beliefs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of patients' medical records was conducted at a private medical centre that delivered the IM protocol for patients with advanced and recurrent ovarian cancers. We explored and analysed the overall survival and disease progressions of those who received the IM treatment for at least 2 months.
RESULTS: Forty patients with advanced ovarian cancers fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this case series. An overall of 75% of the cases achieved remission with initial IM treatment, 17.5% had a partial response and 7.5% showed progressive disease. The overall 5-year survival for all 40 cases is 53.1%. When explored further, the 5-year survival for cases who received CAM only is 75%, and cases who received combined limited chemotherapy with CAM had a 5-year survival of 55%. At study endpoint, 11 cases died due to ovarian cancer.
CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that CAM may be a valuable addition to conventional therapy to treat and improve the survival of patients with ovarian cancers. A formal randomized control trial is required to evaluate the efficacy and long-term outcomes of using IM to treat advanced and recurrent ovarian cancers.
Case presentation: A 33-year-old female presented with recurrent hypoglycemia. Endogenous hyperinsulinemia was confirmed by a prolonged fast, however serial imaging was negative. Incidental finding of an ovarian mass gave rise to the suspicion of an insulin-producing ovarian tumor. Subsequent multimodality pancreatic imaging remained negative, requiring more invasive investigations. The tumor was localized by specialized arteriography using calcium stimulation to support the diagnosis of an insulinoma. However, repeated negative imaging led to further delays in definitive management, with worsening hypoglycemia. The surgery was finally performed three years after the initial presentation with successful removal of the tumor using intra-operative ultrasound.
Clinical discussion: It is important to emphasize that preoperative radiological imaging is useful to localize pancreatic lesions. However, most insulinomas could only be detected intraoperatively. The absence of suggestive radiological evidence should not deter surgeons from proceeding with definitive surgical intervention.
Conclusion: The case highlights the importance of a multidisciplinary approach in the management of a complicated case.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, cases of ovarian and breast cancer with clinical status of T2DM were selected over a 10-year period in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia. Immunohistochemical staining for IGFBP-rP1 was performed on paraffin-embedded tissues and the results were correlated with the patient's demographic and clinicopathological data.
RESULTS: A total of 152 breast cancer patients were recruited into the current study with 33.5% (51/152) patients were positive T2DM. Most of the breast cancer patients with T2DM were IGFBP-rP1-negative (66.7%, 34/51). The IGFBP-rP1 expression was significantly difference between breast cancer subjects with and without T2DM (p<0.001). There was no significant association of IGFBP-rP1 expression with data on the demographic and clinicopathological profiles of patients with breast cancer. Meanwhile, positive IGFBP-rP1 expression was evident in 44 out of 108 (40.74%) ovarian cancer cases. Among these cases, 36 were T2DM. In contrast to breast cancer cases, IGFBP-rP1 was mostly expressed among ovarian cancer patients with T2DM (66.7%, 24/36, p < 0.001). However, the -positive expression was not significantly associated with any sociodemographic and clinicopathological features of ovarian cancers.
CONCLUSIONS: Majority of breast cancer patients with T2DM did not express IGFBP-rP1. In contrast, majority of the ovarian cancer patients with T2DM expressed IGFBP-rP1.