Cervical cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

Cervical cancer is the fourth most common malignancy diagnosed in women worldwide. Nearly all cases of cervical cancer result from infection with the human papillomavirus, and the prevention of cervical cancer includes screening and vaccination. Primary treatment options for patients with cervical cancer may include surgery or a concurrent chemoradiotherapy regimen consisting of cisplatin-based chemotherapy with external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Cervical cancer causes more than one quarter of a million deaths per year as a result of grossly deficient treatments in many developing countries. This warrants a concerted global effort to counter the shocking loss of life and suffering that largely goes unreported. This article provides a review of the biology, prevention, and treatment of cervical cancer, and discusses the global cervical cancer crisis and efforts to improve the prevention and treatment of the disease in underdeveloped countries. Cancer 2017;123:2404-12. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Cervical cancer: A global health crisis

Summary Radiotherapy is a critical and inseparable component of comprehensive cancer treatment and care. For many of the most common cancers in low-income and middle-income countries, radiotherapy is essential for effective treatment. In high-income countries, radiotherapy is used in more than half of all cases of cancer to cure localised disease, palliate symptoms, and control disease in incurable cancers. Yet, in planning and building treatment capacity for cancer, radiotherapy is frequently the last resource to be considered. Consequently, worldwide access to radiotherapy is unacceptably low. We present a new body of evidence that quantifies the worldwide coverage of radiotherapy services by country. We show the shortfall in access to radiotherapy by country and globally for 2015–35 based on current and projected need, and show substantial health and economic benefits to investing in radiotherapy. The cost of scaling up radiotherapy in the nominal model in 2015–35 is US$26·6 billion in low-income countries, $62·6 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $94·8 billion in upper-middle-income countries, which amounts to $184·0 billion across all low-income and middle-income countries. In the efficiency model the costs were lower: $14·1 billion in low-income, $33·3 billion in lower-middle-income, and $49·4 billion in upper-middle-income countries—a total of $96·8 billion. Scale-up of radiotherapy capacity in 2015–35 from current levels could lead to saving of 26·9 million life-years in low-income and middle-income countries over the lifetime of the patients who received treatment. The economic benefits of investment in radiotherapy are very substantial. Using the nominal cost model could produce a net benefit of $278·1 billion in 2015–35 ($265·2 million in low-income countries, $38·5 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $239·3 billion in upper-middle-income countries). Investment in the efficiency model would produce in the same period an even greater total benefit of $365·4 billion ($12·8 billion in low-income countries, $67·7 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $284·7 billion in upper-middle-income countries). The returns, by the human-capital approach, are projected to be less with the nominal cost model, amounting to $16·9 billion in 2015–35 (–$14·9 billion in low-income countries; –$18·7 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $50·5 billion in upper-middle-income countries). The returns with the efficiency model were projected to be greater, however, amounting to $104·2 billion (–$2·4 billion in low-income countries, $10·7 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $95·9 billion in upper-middle-income countries). Our results provide compelling evidence that investment in radiotherapy not only enables treatment of large numbers of cancer cases to save lives, but also brings positive economic benefits.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lanonc/PIIS1470-2045(15)00222-3.pdf

Expanding global access to radiotherapy

Clinical outcome of protocol based image (MRI) guided adaptive brachytherapy combined with 3D conformal radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer.

Technological advances and clinical research over the past few decades have given radiation oncologists the capability to personalize treatments for accurate delivery of radiation dose based on clinical parameters and anatomical information. Eradication of gross and microscopic tumours with preservation of health-related quality of life can be achieved in many patients. Two major strategies, acting synergistically, will enable further widening of the therapeutic window of radiation oncology in the era of precision medicine: technology-driven improvement of treatment conformity, including advanced image guidance and particle therapy, and novel biological concepts for personalized treatment, including biomarker-guided prescription, combined treatment modalities and adaptation of treatment during its course.

Radiation oncology in the era of precision medicine

Background After a 1999 National Cancer Institute (NCI) clinical alert was issued, chemoradiotherapy has become widely used in treating women with cervical cancer. Two subsequent systematic reviews found that interpretation of the benefits was complicated, and some important clinical questions were unanswered. Patients and Methods We initiated a meta-analysis seeking updated individual patient data from all randomized trials to assess the effect of chemoradiotherapy on all outcomes. We prespecified analyses to investigate whether the effect of chemoradiotherapy differed by trial or patient characteristics. Results On the basis of 13 trials that compared chemoradiotherapy versus the same radiotherapy, there was a 6% improvement in 5-year survival with chemoradiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81, P <.001). A larger survival benefit was seen for the two trials in which chemotherapy was administered after chemoradiotherapy. There was a significant survival benefit for both the group of trials that used platinum-based (HR = 0.83, P = .017) and non-platinum-based (HR = 0.77, P <.009) chemoradiotherapy, but no evidence of a difference in the size of the benefit by radiotherapy or chemotherapy dose or scheduling was seen. Chemoradiotherapy also reduced local and distant recurrence and progression and improved disease-free survival. There was a suggestion of a difference in the size of the survival benefit with tumor stage, but not across other patient subgroups. Acute hematologic and GI toxicity was increased with chemoradiotherapy, but data were too sparse for an analysis of late toxicity. Conclusion These results endorse the recommendations of the NCI alert, but also demonstrate their applicability to all women and a benefit of non-platinum-based chemoradiotherapy. Furthermore, although these results suggest an additional benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy, this requires testing in randomized trials.

/pdf/reducing-uncertainties-about-the-effects-of-18030a724c.pdf

Reducing Uncertainties About the Effects of Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data From 18 Randomized Trials

Felix Leborgne

Papers

Reducing Uncertainties About the Effects of Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data From 18 Randomized Trials