Dataset Information

Oncological safety of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of stage I endometrial cancer: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The oncological safety of diagnostic hysteroscopy in patients with stage ? endometrial cancer remains uncertain and conflicting. The aim of the proposed systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarise the available evidence examining the association between diagnostic hysteroscopy and the prognosis of stage ? endometrial cancer and to statistically synthesise the results of relevant studies.

Methods and analysis

Systematic searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science will be undertaken using prespecified search strategies. Two authors will independently conduct eligible studies selection process, perform data extraction and appraise the quality of included studies. Original case-control studies, cohort studies and randomised controlled trails published in English will be considered for inclusion. The outcomes of interest will be 5-year recurrence-free survival, disease-specific survival and overall survival. Meta-analyses will be performed to calculate pooled estimates.

Ethics and dissemination

Our study will be based on published data, and thus there is no requirement for ethics approval. The results will be shared through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at academic conferences.

Prospero registration number

CRD42020193696.

SUBMITTER: Xu Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7733216 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Oncological safety of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of stage I endometrial cancer: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Xu Yu Y Zhang Qian Wen QW Du Yi Y Qin Zhao Juan ZJ He Yue Dong YD Zheng Ai A

BMJ open 20201210 12

<h4>Background</h4>The oncological safety of diagnostic hysteroscopy in patients with stage Ⅰ endometrial cancer remains uncertain and conflicting. The aim of the proposed systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarise the available evidence examining the association between diagnostic hysteroscopy and the prognosis of stage Ⅰ endometrial cancer and to statistically synthesise the results of relevant studies.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>Systematic searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochran ...[more]

PMID: 33303464

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives: To evaluate the oncological outcomes and safety of ovarian preservation, and to review the prognostic factors for ovarian metastases in early stage cervical adenocarcinoma. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for publications up to January 2019. Two investigators independently screened the studies for eligibility and extracted specific data. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using STATA statistical software version 19.0. Results: A total of 68 unique manuscripts were identified through the search strategy, and 10 studies were included in the meta-analysis of the safety of ovarian preservation. Fixed-effects model was used because of moderate heterogeneity. Pooled results of the included studies showed that ovarian preservation is not associated with a statistically significant OS (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.64-1.56, I 2 = 25.7%) or PFS (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.57-1.66, I 2 = 0%) in early stage cervical adenocarcinoma. In addition, 19 studies were included in the review of prognostic factors for cervical adenocarcinoma and risk factors for ovarian metastases. The incidence of ovarian metastases was 0% in stage IA, 2.8% in stage IB, 3.4% in stage IIA, and 11.8% in stage IIB cervical adenocarcinoma. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, tumor size, deep stromal invasion (DSI), lymph node metastasis (LNM), and vaginal invasion were significantly related to poor prognosis. Risk factors associated with ovarian metastases included age, FIGO stage, tumor size, DSI, parametrial invasion, corpus uteri invasion, LNM, vaginal invasion, and blood vessel invasion. Conclusions: Ovarian preservation in young patients with early stage cervical adenocarcinoma is safe and has no significant effect on OS or PFS. Preserving ovaries in patients with FIGO stage IIB seems not reasonable because of the high rate of ovarian metastasis.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Minimally invasive surgery in urology has grown considerably in application since its initial description in the early 1990s. Herein, we present the protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing open versus robotic urological oncological surgery for various clinically relevant outcomes, as well as to assess their comparative penetrance over the past 20 years (2000-2020). METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will document the penetrance of robotic versus open surgery in the urological oncological field using a national database.Second, we will perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published full-text English and non-English language articles from Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science search engines on surgical treatment of localised prostate, bladder, kidney and testis cancer published between 1st January 2000 to 10th January 2020. We will focus on the highest-volume urological oncological surgeries, namely, radical prostatectomy, radical cystectomy, partial nephrectomy, radical nephrectomy and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Study inclusion criteria will comprise clinical trials and prospective and retrospective studies (cohort or case-control series) comparing robotic versus open surgery. Exclusion criteria will comprise meta-analyses, multiple papers with overalapping study-periods, studies analysing national databases and case series describing only one approach (robotic or open). Risk of bias for included studies will be assessed by the appropriate Cochrane risk of bias tool. Principal outcomes assessed will include perioperative, functional, oncological survival and financial outcomes of open versus robotic uro-oncological surgery. Sensitivity analyses will be performed to correlate outcomes of interest with key baseline characteristics and surrogates of surgical expertise. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis will provide rigorous, consolidated information on contemporary outcomes and trends of open versus robotic urological oncological surgery based on all the available literature. These aggregate data will help physicians better advise patients seeking surgical care for urological cancers. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017064958.

Project description:ObjectiveEndometrial cancer uncommonly presents at an advanced stage and little prospective evidence exists to guide the management thereof. We aimed to summarize the evidence about primary cytoreductive surgery in the treatment of advanced stage endometrial cancer.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases were searched from inception to September 11, 2020, using search terms representing the themes "endometrial cancer," "advanced stage," and "primary cytoreductive surgery."Study eligibility criteriaWe included full-text, English reports that included ≥10 patients undergoing primary cytoreductive surgery for advanced stage endometrial cancer and that reported on the outcomes of primary cytoreductive surgery and survival rates based on the residual disease burden.MethodsTwo reviewers independently screened the studies and with disagreements between the reviewers resolved by a third reviewer. Data were extracted using a standardized form. The percentage of cases reaching maximal (no gross residual disease) and optimal (<1 cm or <2 cm residual disease) cytoreduction were assessed by summing binomials proportions, and the association with survival was assessed using an inverse variance-weighted meta-analysis of logarithmic hazard ratios.ResultsFrom 1219 unique records identified, 34 studies were selected for inclusion. Studies consisted of single or multi-institutional cohorts of patients collected over a period of 6 to 24 years and included various mixes of histologies (endometrioid, serous, clear cell, and carcinosarcoma) and disease stages (III or IV). In a meta-analysis of the extent of residual disease after primary cytoreductive surgery, we found that 52.1% of cases reached no gross residual disease status (n=18 studies; 1329 patients) and 75% reached <1 cm residual disease status (n=27 studies; 2343 patients). The proportion of cytoreduction for both thresholds was lower for studies of stage IV vs stage III to IV disease (41.4% vs 69.8% for no gross residual disease; 63.2% vs 82.2% for <1 cm residual disease) but did not vary notably by histology. In a meta-analysis of the reported hazard ratios, submaximal (any gross residual disease vs no gross residual disease) and suboptimal (≥1 cm vs <1 cm) cytoreduction thresholds were associated with worse progression-free survival (submaximal hazard ratio, 2.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.45-3.21; I2=68%; suboptimal hazard ratio, 2.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.93-3.37; I2=63%) and overall survival rates (submaximal hazard ratio, 2.57; 95% confidence interval, 2.13-3.10; I2=1%; suboptimal hazard ratio, 2.62; 95% confidence interval, 2.20-3.11; I2=15%). Sensitivity analyses limited to high-quality studies demonstrated consistent results.ConclusionAmong cases of advanced stage endometrial cancer undergoing primary cytoreductive surgery, a significant proportion of patients are left with residual disease, which is associated with worse survival outcomes. Further investigations about the roles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and primary cytoreductive surgery in prospective trials is warranted in this population.

Dataset Information

Oncological safety of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of stage I endometrial cancer: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Prospero registration number

Publications

Oncological safety of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of stage I endometrial cancer: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets