OBJECTIVE: Imaging guidelines could play an important role in the training of radiologists, but the extent of their adoption in residency programs is unclear. With this survey, the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) Junior Network aimed to assess the dissemination of the ESUR guidelines on endometrial cancer MRI staging (EC-ESUR guidelines) among young radiologists.
METHODS: An online questionnaire targeted to last year radiology residents and radiologists in the first year of their career was designed. It included 24 questions, structured in 4 sections (i.e., background, general, acquisition protocol, interpretation, and reporting). The survey was active between April and May 2022, accepting answers worldwide. Answers were solicited with a social media campaign and with the support of national scientific societies. Subgroup analysis was performed based on variables such as subspecialty of interest and number of EC-ESUR guidelines consultations using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.
RESULTS: In total, 118 participants completed the questionnaire, of which 94 (80%) were from Europe and 46 (39%) with a special interest in urogenital radiology. Overall, 68 (58%) stated that the guidelines were not part of their residency teaching programs while 32 (27%) had never even consulted the guidelines. Interest in urogenital radiology as a subspecialty and EC-ESUR guidelines consultations were associated with greater confidence in supervising scan acquisition, interpreting, and reporting EC MRI staging exams.
CONCLUSIONS: Four years after publication, the adoption of EC-ESUR guidelines in residency programs is heterogeneously low. Despite a possible selection bias, our findings indicate that active promotion of EC-ESUR guidelines is required.
CONCLUSIONS: • The adoption of ESUR guidelines on endometrial cancer in radiology residency programs is heterogeneous. • Almost one third of respondents stated they had never even consulted the guidelines. • Confidence toward guidelines was higher in those who were exposed to more endometrial cancer MRI staging scans. • Reading the guidelines was associated with a greater confidence in protocol acquisition, interpretation, and reporting. • Active efforts to promote their dissemination are required.

Summary The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer, first published in April 2018, was reviewed in its entirety between April 2020 and January 2022 and updated. The review was carried out at the request of German Cancer Aid as part of the Oncology Guidelines Program and the lead coordinators were the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), the Gynecology Oncology Working Group (AGO) of the German Cancer Society (DKG) and the German Cancer Aid (DKH). The guideline update was based on a systematic search and assessment of the literature published between 2016 and 2020. All statements, recommendations and background texts were reviewed and either confirmed or amended. New statements and recommendations were included where necessary. Aim The use of evidence-based risk-adapted therapies to treat women with endometrial cancer of low risk prevents unnecessarily radical surgery and avoids non-beneficial adjuvant radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy. For women with endometrial cancer and a high risk of recurrence, the guideline defines the optimum level of radical surgery and indicates whether chemotherapy and/or adjuvant radiation therapy is necessary. This should improve the survival rates and quality of life of these patients. The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer and the quality indicators based on the guideline aim to provide the basis for the work of certified gynecological cancer centers. Methods The guideline was first compiled in 2018 in accordance with the requirements for S3-level guidelines and was updated in 2022. The update included an adaptation of the source guidelines identified using the German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal (DELBI). The update also used evidence reviews which were created based on selected literature obtained from systematic searches in selected literature databases using the PICO process. The Clinical Guidelines Service Group was tasked with carrying out a systematic search and assessment of the literature. Their results were used by interdisciplinary working groups as a basis for developing suggestions for recommendations and statements which were then modified during structured online consensus conferences and/or additionally amended online using the DELPHI process to achieve a consensus. Recommendations Part 1 of this short version of the guideline provides recommendations on epidemiology, screening, diagnosis, and hereditary factors. The epidemiology of endometrial cancer and the risk factors for developing endometrial cancer are presented. The options for screening and the methods used to diagnose endometrial cancer are outlined. Recommendations are given for the prevention, diagnosis, and therapy of hereditary forms of endometrial cancer. The use of geriatric assessment is considered and existing structures of care are presented.

Background: Provider uncertainty about the appropriate guideline-concordant evaluation of endometrial cancer (EC) symptoms may be a factor in racial inequities in EC. To evaluate the relationship between EC knowledge and reported practice patterns in a nationally representative survey of first-line providers for initial EC symptoms. Materials and Methods: This was a mailed cross-sectional survey of physicians and nurse practitioners from professional organization roster of providers from Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN), Family Medicine, Internal Medicine, and Emergency Medicine. It queried demographics, practice characteristics, EC knowledge, and guideline-concordant practice patterns via three case vignettes. Regions of low response were retargeted to ensure strong representation among providers caring for Black women patients. EC knowledge was analyzed via a composite score (range: -3 to 10, with higher scores representing more EC knowledge), and adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) used to test the association between knowledge and reported practice patterns. Results: Among 531 returned surveys (response rate = 38%), OBGYN had highest (53%) frequency of >6 (median) EC knowledge score, and Emergency Medicine had the lowest (15%) (p < 0.001). Nonguideline-concordant practice patterns were reported in 14%, 41%, and 35% of the three EC cases presented. Providers with knowledge >6, (n = 205) were significantly more likely to report guideline-concordant care on case vignettes (PR 1.28-1.36). Conclusions: In a national survey of multi-specialty backgrounds, there were basic knowledge gaps about EC and EC risk factors among providers, and a sizeable proportion reported nonguideline concordant practices. These findings indicate the importance of targeted education and training for first-line providers, as EC incidence rises.

UNASSIGNED: Endometrial cancer is of increasing concern in several countries, including Brazil, in part because of an ageing population, declines in fertility, and the increasing prevalence of obesity. Although endometrial tumors had lagged behind other cancer types in terms of treatment improvements, molecular characterization of these tumors is paving the way for novel therapies and an expansion of the therapeutic arsenal. We aimed to help medical oncologists who manage patients with recurrent or metastatic endometrial cancer in the Brazilian healthcare setting.
UNASSIGNED: The panel, composed of 20 medical oncologists, convened in November 2021 to address 50 multiple-choice questions on molecular testing and treatment choices. We classified the level of agreement among panelists as (1) consensus (≥75% choosing the same answer), (2) majority vote (50% to <75%), or (3) less than majority vote (<50%).
UNASSIGNED: Consensus was present for 25 of the 50 questions, whereas majority vote was present for an additional 23 questions. Key recommendations include molecular testing for every patient with recurrent/metastatic endometrial cancer; choice of first-line treatment according to microsatellite instability and HER2, with the addition of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and hormone receptors (HRs) for second-line therapy; carboplatin and paclitaxel as the preferred option in first-line treatment of HER2-negative disease, with the addition of trastuzumab in HER2-positive disease; pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib as a key option in second line, regardless of HER2, PD-L1 or HRs; and various recommendations regarding treatment choice for patients with distinct comorbidities.
UNASSIGNED: Despite the existing gaps in the current literature, the vast majority of issues addressed by the panel provided a level of agreement sufficient to inform clinical practice in Brazil and in other countries with similar healthcare environments.

BACKGROUND: Due to the increasing amount of published data suggesting that endometrial carcinoma is a heterogenic entity with possible different treatment sequences and post-treatment follow-up, the Polish Society of Gynecological Oncology (PSGO) has developed new guidelines.
OBJECTIVE: to summarize the current evidence for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of endometrial carcinoma and to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice.
METHODS: The guidelines have been developed according to standards set by the guideline evaluation tool AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation). The strength of scientific evidence has been defined in agreement with The Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Tariff System (AOTMiT) guidelines for scientific evidence classification. The grades of recommendation have been based on the strength of evidence and the level of consensus of the PSGO development group.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on current evidence, both the implementation of the molecular classification of endometrial cancer patients at the beginning of the treatment sequence and the extension of the final postoperative pathological report of additional biomarkers are needed to optimize and improve treatment results as well as to pave the route for future clinical trials on targeted therapies.

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological malignancy in Europe and its management involves a variety of health professionals. In recent years, big discoveries were made concerning the management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer, particularly in the field of molecular biology and minimally invasive surgery. This requires the continuous updating of guidelines and protocols over the years. In this paper, we aim to summarize and compare common points and disparities among protocols for management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer by leading international gynecological oncological societies. We therefore systematically report the parallel among the guidelines based on the various steps patients with endometrial cancer usually undergo. The comparison between American and European protocols revealed some relevant disparities, in particular regarding surgical staging, molecular biology application as a prognostic tool and follow up regimens. This could possibly cause differences in interpreting and applying protocols in clinical practice in small centers, leading to a lack of adherence to guidelines or even prompting a confusing mix of them.

The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with endometrial cancer was published in 2022. It was therefore decided, by both the ESMO and the Indian Society of Medical and Paediatric Oncology (ISMPO), to convene a virtual meeting in July 2022 to adapt the ESMO 2022 guidelines to take into account the variations in the management of endometrial cancer in Asia. These guidelines represent the consensus opinion of a panel of Asian experts representing the oncological societies of China (CSCO), India (ISMPO), Indonesia (ISHMO), Japan (JSMO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), the Philippines (PSMO), Singapore (SSO), Taiwan (TOS) and Thailand (TSCO). Voting was based on scientific evidence and was conducted independently of the current treatment practices and treatment access constraints in the different Asian countries, which were discussed when appropriate. The aim of this guideline manuscript is to provide guidance for the optimisation and harmonisation of the management of patients with endometrial cancer across the different regions of Asia, drawing on the evidence provided by Western and Asian trials whilst respecting the variations in clinical presentation, diagnostic practices including molecular profiling and disparities in access to therapeutic options, including drug approvals and reimbursement strategies.

OBJECTIVE: Data from randomized controlled trials in high-grade endometrial cancer are scarce due to its low prevalence. Therefore, guideline recommendations in this cancer subtype rely on relatively few randomized trials and data from retrospective studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefits from guideline-concordant therapy in high-grade endometrial cancer in a real-world patient group.
METHODS: The effect of treatment according to German S3 guidelines and the former S2k guideline on overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) was evaluated in a cohort of 293 high-grade endometrial cancer patients.
RESULTS: Treatment concordant with the S3 guideline significantly improved OS (HR 0.623, CI 0.420-0.923, p = 0.018) and RFS (HR 0.578, CI 0.387-0.863, p = 0.007). Treatment concordant with the S2k guideline did not result in a significantly higher OS (HR 0.783, CI 0.465-1.316, p = 0.335) or RFS (HR 0.741, CI 0.347-1.740, p = 0.242).
CONCLUSIONS: Therapy according to the German S3 guideline improved OS and RFS in univariate as well as multivariate analysis in this cohort of high-grade endometrial cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare national and international guidelines regarding sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping in endometrial cancer.
METHODS: A descriptive comparative study of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO), the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO), the British Gynecological Cancer Society (BGCS), and the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (JSGO) guidelines.
RESULTS: There is a broad consensus that SLN mapping is an appropriate alternative to pelvic lymphadenectomy for uterine-confined endometrioid endometrial cancer (five of five guidelines). It is broadly accepted that a full lymphadenectomy should be performed in case of failed SLN mapping (four of five guidelines), and that mapping with the fluorescent dye indocyanine green is superior to other methods (four of five guidelines). It is agreed that the cervix is the preferable site for dye injection (four of five guidelines), and pathology ultrastaging is advocated by most guidelines (three of five guidelines). Regarding high-risk patients (i.e., high-grade histology and non-endometroid carcinomas), some guidelines accept (three of five), but others currently do not advocate (one of five guidelines), SLN mapping as a sole method for lymph node evaluation. There is no consensus regarding para-aortic lymph node evaluation in pelvic SLN-positive patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Guidelines for SLN mapping are comparable with regards to surgical technique, ultrastaging, and management in case of failed mapping. Nevertheless, some variations exist regarding the management of high-grade histology and positive pelvic lymph nodes.

暂无摘要。