Surgery for Cervical Cancer: Perspectives from Low- and Middle-Income Countries
- 1 Downloads
This review and opinion provides a very brief overview of current thinking about surgery for cervical cancer. The aim is to add the perspectives of gynaecologic oncologists working in low- and middle-income countries and consider where these may differ from the oft-quoted perspectives of professionals in high-income settings.
This article firstly explores aspects of cervical cancer and its treatment that differ between low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries. Secondly, newer developments in the surgical management of primary and recurrent cervical cancers are considered. Lastly, it is discussed where and why perspectives from LMIC may be different from the ‘global standard’.
The reader will be challenged to rethink the applicability of widely published current opinions to all areas in the world. It is acknowledged that LMIC represents a large spectrum over multiple continents and that considerations will not apply to all settings. Some developments may be detrimental to countries without disease control, while other concepts offer hope and innovation.
Different conditions in LMIC and the solutions found by health professionals working there, must be noted by the wide fraternity as a contribution to science. Adherence to global guidelines should not be expected.
KeywordsCervical cancer Radical hysterectomy Low-resource setting Adjuvant Radiation
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 15.Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH, Kim YM, Kim YT, et al. Comparison of outcomes between radical hysterectomy followed by tailored adjuvant therapy versus primary chemoradiation therapy in IB2 and IIA2 cervical cancer. J Gynecol Oncol. 2012;23(4):226–34. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2012.23.4.226.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 16.Nama V, Angelopoulos G, Twigg J, Murdoch JB, Bailey J, Lawrie TA. Type II or Type III radical hysterectomy compared to chemotherapy as a primary intervention for stage IB2 cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd011478.pub2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 19.Apolitano U, Imperato F, Mossa B, et al. The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for squamous cell cervical cancer (Ib–IIIb): a long-term randomized trial. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2003;24:51–9.Google Scholar
- 24.Morris R, Baker VV. Is less more? Rethinking the extent of surgery for invasive cervical cancer. Curr Women’s Health Rep. 2002;2:15–9.Google Scholar
- 30.Malzoni M, Malzoni C, Perone C, et al. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (type III) and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Eur J Gynecol Oncol. 2004;25:525–7.Google Scholar
- 34.Cibula D, Pötter R, Planchamp F, et al. The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Virchows Arch. 2018;472:919. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-018-2362-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 39.Kietpeerakool C, Aue-aungkul A, Galaal K, Ngamjarus C, Lumbiganon P. Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer. Cochrane Library https://www.cochrane.org/CD012828/GYNAECA_nerve-sparing-radical-hysterectomy-early-stage-cervical-cancer. Accessed 12 July 2019.
- 41.Sedlis A, Bundy BN, Rothman MZ, et al. A randomized trial of pelvic radiation therapy versus no further therapy in selected patients with stage lB carcinoma of the cervix after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;73:177–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 43.Tabata T, Nishiura K, Yanoh K, et al. A pilot study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with mitomycin C, etoposide, cisplatin, and epirubicin for adenocarcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol. 2004;9:59–63.Google Scholar