Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:02:23.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Section 8 - Uterus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2021

Edited by
Tahir Mahmood ,
Charles Savona-Ventura ,
Ioannis Messinis  and
Sambit Mukhopadhyay
Tahir Mahmood
Affiliation:
Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy
Charles Savona-Ventura
Affiliation:
University of Malta, Malta
Ioannis Messinis
Affiliation:
University of Thessaly, Greece
Sambit Mukhopadhyay
Affiliation:
Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital, UK
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The EBCOG Postgraduate Textbook of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Gynaecology
 , pp. 293 - 316
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Ayhan, A, Reed, N, Gultenkin, M, Dursun, P. Endometrial cancer epidemiology & treatment. In: Textbook of Gynaecological Oncology, 3rd edition. Ankara: Günes Publishing, 2016, pp. 529–538.Google Scholar
Colombo, N, Creutzberg, C, Amant, F, et al. ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO consensus conference on endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2016;26:2–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Setiawan, VW, Yang, HP, Pike, MC, et al. Type I and II endometrial cancers: have they different risk factors? JCO 2013;31:2607–2618.Google Scholar
Ayhan, A, Reed, N, Gultenkin, M, Dursun, P. Endometrial hyperplasia without atypia and endometrioid intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN). In: Textbook of Gynaecological Oncology, 3rd edition. Ankara: Günes Publishing, 2016, pp. 509–515.Google Scholar
RCOG. Management of endometrial hyperplasia. Green-top Guideline No. 67. 2016. Available at : www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/guidelines/green-top-guidelines/gtg_67_endometrial_hyperplasia.pdf.Google Scholar
Berek, JS. Berek & Novak’s Gynecology, 15th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2014.Google Scholar
Morice, P, Leary, A, Creutzberg, C, Abu-Rustum, N, Darai, E. Endometrial cancer. Lancet 2018;387:1094–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iijima, M, Banno, K, Okawa, R, et al. Genome-wide analysis of gynecologic cancer: The Cancer Genome Atlas in ovarian and endometrial cancer. Oncol Lett 2018;13:1063–1070.Google Scholar
Talhouk, A, McAlpine, JN. New classification of endometrial cancers: the development and potential applications of genomic-based classification in research and clinical care. Gynaecol Oncol Res Pract 2018;3:14.Google Scholar
Ayhan, A, Reed, N, Gultenkin, M, Dursun, P. Use of preoperative biomarkers to identify high risk endometrial carcinoma patients. In: Textbook of Gynaecological Oncology, 3rd edition. Ankara: Günes Publishing, 2016, pp. 653–659.Google Scholar
Ayhan, A, Reed, N, Gultenkin, M, Dursun, P. Histopathology of endometrioid endometrial cancer. In: Textbook of Gynaecological Oncology, 3rd edition. Ankara: Günes Publishing, 2016, pp. 539–542.Google Scholar
Ayhan, A, Reed, N, Gultenkin, M, Dursun, P. Uterine serous carcinomas. In: Textbook of Gynaecological Oncology, 3rd edition. Ankara: Günes Publishing, 2016, pp. 565–579.Google Scholar
Ayhan, A, Reed, N, Gultenkin, M, Dursun, P. Uterine clear cell carcinomas. In: Textbook of Gynaecological Oncology, 3rd edition. Ankara: Günes Publishing, 2016, pp. 579–585.Google Scholar
Colombo, N, Preti, E, Landoni, F, et al. Endometrial cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2018;24:vi33–vi38.Google Scholar
Munro, M. Investigation of women with postmenopausal uterine bleeding: clinical practice recommendations. Perm J 2014;18:55–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koutlaki, N, Dimitraki, M, Zervoudis, S, et al. Hysteroscopy and endometrial cancer: diagnosis and influence on prognosis. Gynecol Surg 2018;7:335–341.Google Scholar
Frühauf, F, Zikan, M, Semeradova, I, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in assessment of myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer: subjective assessment versus objective techniques. Bio Med Res Int 2017. doi: 10.1155/2017/1318203.Google Scholar
Nougaret, S, Horta, M, Sala, E, et al. Endometrial cancer MRI staging: updated guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol 2018;29:792–705.Google Scholar
Pecorelli, S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2009;105:103–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ayhan, A, Reed, N, Gultenkin, M, Dursun, P. Conservative treatment of early endometrial cancer. In: Textbook of Gynaecological Oncology, 3rd edition. Ankara: Günes Publishing, 2016, pp. 586–593.Google Scholar
Stephan, J-M, Hansen, J, Samuelson, M, et al. Intra-operative frozen section results reliably predict final pathology in endometrial cancer. Gynecologic Oncol 2018;133:499–405.Google Scholar
Cripe, J, Handorf, E, Brown, J, et al. National Cancer Database report of lymphadenectomy trends in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2017;27:1408–1415.Google Scholar
Ramirez, PT, Frumovitz, M, Abu-Rustum, NR. Principles of Gynecologic Oncology Surgery. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier, 2018.Google Scholar
Holloway, RW, Abu-Rustum, NR, Backes, FJ, et al. Sentinel lymph node mapping and staging in endometrial cancer: a Society of Gynecologic Oncology literature review with consensus recommendations. Gynecologic Oncol 2017;146:405–415.Google Scholar
Bodurtha Smith, AJ, Fader, AN, Tanner, EJ. Sentinel lymph node assessment in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017;216:459–476.e10.Google Scholar
Piovano, E, Fuso, L, Poma, CB, et al. Complications after the treatment of endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2014;24:418–426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Viswanathan, AN, Lee, LJ, Eswara, JR, et al. Complications of pelvic radiation in patients treated for gynecologic malignancies. Cancer 2014;120:3870–3883.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Boer, SM, Powell, ME, Mileshkin, L, et al. Toxicity and quality of life after adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for women with high-risk endometrial cancer (PORTEC-3): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2016;17:1114–1126.Google Scholar
Zhang, Y, Zhao, D, Gong, C, et al. Prognostic role of hormone receptors in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol 2015;13.Google Scholar
Karnezis, AN, Leung, S, Magrill, J, et al. Evaluation of endometrial carcinoma prognostic immunohistochemistry markers in the context of molecular classification. J Path Clin Res 2017;3:279–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

References

Francis, M, Dennis, NL, Hischowitz, L, et al. Incidence and survival of gynaecologic sarcomas in England. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2015;25:850–857.Google Scholar
Oliva, E, Carcangiu, ML, Carinelli, SG, et al. Mesenchymal tumours. In: WHO Classification of Tumours of Female Reproductive Organs. Lyon: IARC, 2014, pp. 122–151.Google Scholar
Prat, J, Mbatani, N. Uterine sarcomas. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2015;131:S105–S110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hosh, M, Antar, S, Nazzal, A, et al. Uterine sarcoma: analysis of 13089 cases based on Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2016;26:1098–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garret, LA, Harmon, DC, Schorge, JO. Embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma of the uterine corpus. JCO 2013;31:e48–e50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrari, A, Dileo, P, Casanova, M, et al. Rhabdomyosarcoma in adults: a retrospective analysis of 171 patients treated at a single institution. Cancer 2003;98:571–580.Google Scholar
Minard-Colin, V, Walterhouse, D, Bisogno, G, et al. Localized vaginal/uterine rhabdomyosarcoma: results of a pooled analysis from four international cooperative groups. Pediatr Blood Cancer, 2018. doi: 10.1002/pbc.27096.Google Scholar
Felix, AS, Cook, LS, Gaudet, MM, et al. The etiology of uterine sarcomas: a pooled analysis of the epidemiology of endometrial cancer consortium. Br J Cancer 2013;108:727–734.Google Scholar
Pernick, N, Smooth muscle tumors of unknown malignant potential. Available at: www.pathologyoutlines.com/topic/uterusSTUMP.html.Google Scholar
Benson, C, Miah, AB. Uterine sarcoma: current perspectives. Int J Womens Health 2017;9:597–606.Google Scholar
Tropé, CG, Abeler, VM, Kristensen, GB. Diagnosis and treatment of sarcoma of the uterus: a review. Acta Oncol 2012;51:694–705.Google Scholar
Amant, F, Coosemans, A, Debiec-Rychter, M, Timmerman, D, Vergote, I. Clinical management of uterine sarcomas. Lancet Oncol 2009;10:1188–1198.Google Scholar
Goto, A, Takeuchi, S, Sugimura, K, Maruo, T. Usefulness of Gd-DTPA contrast enhanced dynamic MRI and serum determination of LDH and its isozymes in the differential diagnosis of leiomyosarcoma from degenerated leiomyoma of the uterus. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2002;12:354–361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sizzi, O, Manganaro, L, Rosetti, A, et al. Assessing the risk of laparoscopic morcellation of occult uterine sarcomas during hysterectomy and myomectomy: literature review and the ISGE recommendations. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018;220:30–38.Google Scholar
Perri, T, Korach, J, Sadetzki, S, et al. Uterine leiomyosarcoma: does the primary surgical procedure matter? Int J Gynecol Cancer 2009;19:257–260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
US Food and Drug Administration, UPDATED laparoscopic uterine power morcellation in hysterectomy and myomectomy. FDA Safety Communication. 2014. Available at: www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm393576.htm.Google Scholar
Harris, JA, Swenson, CW, Uppal, S, et al. Practice patterns and postoperative complications before and after US Food and Drug Administration safety communications on power morcellation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214:98.e1–98.e13.Google Scholar
Bose, D. Fate of laparoscopic morcellation post-FDA warning: a literature review. Int J Med Res Rev 2016;4:1871–1881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Power Morcellation and Occult Malignancy in Gynecologic Surgery. Washington DC: ACOG, 2014.Google Scholar
Clavero, JM, Deschamps, C, Cassivi, SD, et al. Gynecologic cancers: factors affecting survival after pulmonary metastasectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2006;81:2004–2007.Google Scholar
Reed, NS, Mangioni, C, Malmström, H, et al. Phase III randomised study to evaluate the role of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy in the treatment of uterine sarcomas stages I and II: an European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gynaecological Cancer Group Study (protocol 55874). Eur J Cancer 2008;44:808–818.Google Scholar
Malouf, GG, Lhommé, C, Duvillard, P, et al. Prognostic factors and outcome of undifferentiated endometrial sarcoma treated by multimodal therapy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2013;122:57–61.Google Scholar
Seagle, BL, Sobecki-Rausch, J, Strohl, AE, et al. Prognosis and treatment of uterine leiomyosarcoma: a National Cancer Database study. Gynecol Oncol 2017;145:61–70.Google Scholar
Desar, IME, Ottevanger, PB, Benson, C, van der Graaf, WTA. Systemic treatment in adult uterine sarcomas. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2018;122:10–20.Google Scholar
Seddon, B, Strauss, SJ, Whelan, J, et al. Gemcitabine and docetaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line treatment in previously untreated advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas (GeDDiS): a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2017;18:1397–1410.Google Scholar
Judson, I, Verweij, J, Gelderblom, H, et al. Doxorubicin alone versus intensified doxorubicin plus ifosfamide for first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2014;15:415–423.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thanopoulou, E, Thway, K, Khabra, K, Judson, J. Treatment of hormone positive uterine leiomyosarcoma with aromatase inhibitors. Clin Sarcoma Res 2014;4:5.Google Scholar
Thanopoulou, E, Aleksic, A, Thway, K, Khabra, K, Judson, I. Hormonal treatments in metastatic endometrial stromal sarcomas: the 10-year experience of the sarcoma unit of Royal Marsden Hospital. Clin Sarcoma Res 2015;5:8.Google Scholar
Nakayama, K, Ishikawa, M, Nagai, Y, et al. Prolonged long-term survival of low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma patients with lung metastasis following treatment with medroxyprogesterone acetate. Int J Clin Oncol 2010;15:179–183.Google Scholar
Tap WD et al. Effect of doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo on survival in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcomas. The ANNOUNCE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2020;323:1266–1276.Google Scholar
Elvin, JA, Gay, LM, Ort, R, et al. Clinical benefit in response to palbociclib treatment in refractory uterine leiomyosarcomas with a common CDKN2A alteration. Oncologist 2017;22:416–421.Google Scholar
van der Graaf, WTA, Blay, J-Y, Chawla, SP, et al. Pazopanib for metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (PALETTE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2012;379:1879–1886.Google Scholar
George, S, Miao, D, Demetri, GD, et al. Loss of PTEN associated with resistance to anti-PD-1 checkpoint blockade therapy in metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma. Immunity 2017;46: 197–204.Google Scholar
Martin-Liberal, J, Benson, C, Messiou, C, Fisher, C, Judson, I. Reversion of hormone treatment resistance with the addition of an mTOR inhibitor in endometrial stromal sarcoma. Case Rep Med 2014. doi:10.1155/2014/612496.Google Scholar
Jimenez, WA, Sardi, A, Nieroda, C, Gushchin, V. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the management of recurrent high-grade uterine sarcoma with peritoneal dissemination. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014;210:259e1–259e8.Google Scholar
Carroll, A, Ramirez, PT, Westin, SN, et al. Uterine adenosarcoma: an analysis on management, outcome and risk factors for recurrence. Gynecol Oncol 2014;135:455–461.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×