Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Can We Be Less Radical with Surgery for Early Cervical Cancer?

  • Gynecologic Cancers (NS Reed, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Oncology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although a rare cancer in the developed world due to the success of cervical screening programmes, cervical cancer remains one of the most common cancers diagnosed in women under the age of 35 years old. Radical hysterectomy and more recently radical trachelectomy have been highly effective in curing the majority of women with early stage disease. Many, however, are left with long-term ‘survivorship’ issues including bowel, bladder and sexual dysfunction. In view of these chronic co-morbidities, many clinicians now consider whether a less radical approach to surgery may be an option for some women. This review focuses on the current evidence for the safety of conservative surgery for early stage cervical cancer with regard to cure rates in comparison to standard management, as well as any improvement in short and long-term morbidity associated with a more conservative approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major importance

  1. Cancer Research UK. http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/cervical-cancer#heading-Zero. Accessed 29 Sept 2015.

  2. Sasieni P, Castanon A, editors. NHSCSP Audit of Invasive Cervical Cancer: National Report for 2009 – 2013, NHSCSP 2014. http://www.cytologytraining.co.uk/pdf/nhscsp-audit-of-invasive-cervical-cancer-july-2011.pdf. Accessed 26 Jan 2016.

  3. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, Garshell J, Miller D, Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Yu M, Ruhl J, Tatalovich Z, Mariotto A, Lewis DR, Chen HS, Feuer EJ, Cronin KA (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2012, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2012/, based on November 2014 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, April 2015.

  4. Abryn M, Castellsague X, de Sanjose S, Bruni L, Saraiya M, Bray F, et al. Worldwide burden of cervical cancer in 2008. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:2675–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Roque DR, Wysham WZ, Soper JT. Surgical management of CC The Surgical Management of Cervical Cancer: an overview and literature. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2014;69(7):426–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rogers L, Siu SSN, Luesley D, Bryant A, Dickinson HO. Radiotherapy and chemoradiation after surgery for early cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;5:CD007583. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007583.pub3.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Guideline 99. Management of cervical cancer: a national clinical guideline. NHS Scotland 2008. http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign99.pdf. Accessed 29 Sept 2015.

  8. Covens A, Rosen B, Murphy J, Laframboise S, DePetrillo AD, Lickrish G, et al. Changes in the demographics and perioperative care of stage IA(2)/IB(1) cervical cancer over the past 16 years. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;81:133–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Reade CJ, Eiriksson LR, Covens A. Surgery for early stage cervical cancer: how radical should it be? Gynecol Oncol. 2013;131:222–30. Radical surgery for early cervical cancer is associated with significant short and long term morbidities. Less radical management appears to be safe in selected patients.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Childbearing for women born in different years, England and Wales 2013. The Office of National Statistics. 2014, London, UK. available @ URL http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_371129.pdf<. Accessed 29 Sept 2015.

  11. Plante M, Gregoire J, Renaud MC, Roy M. The vaginal radical trachelectomy: an update of a series of 125 cases and 106 pregnancies. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121:290–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wethington SL, Cibula D, Duska LR, Garrett L, Kim CH, Chi DS, et al. An international series on abdominal radical trachelectomy: 101 patients and 28 pregnancies. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2012;22:1251–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Farthing AJ, Ghaem-Maghami S. Fertility Sparing Treatments in Gynaecological Cancers Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Scientific Impact Paper No. 35, 2013. http://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassests/documents/guidelines/scientific-impact-papers/sip_35.pdf. Accessed 26 Jan 2016.

  14. Colombo NS, Carinelli S, Colombo AC, Marini C, Rollo D, Sessa C. Cervical cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(7):vii27–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Malzoni M, Tinelli R, Cosentino F, Fusco A, Malzoni C. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy versus abdominal radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: our experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(5):1316–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Raspagliesi F, Ditto A, Fontanelli R, Zanaboni F, Solima E, Spatti G, et al. Type II versus type III nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: comparison of lower urinary tract dysfunctions. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;102(2):256–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Todo Y, Kuwabara M, Watari H, Ebina Y, Takeda M, Kudo M, et al. Urodynamic study on postsurgical bladder function in cervical cancer treated with systematic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16(1):369–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Froeding LP, Ottosen C, Rung-Hansen H, Svane D, Mosgaard BJ, Jensen PT. Sexual functioning and vaginal changes after radical vaginal trachelectomy in early stage cervical cancer patients: a longitudinal study. J Sex Med. 2014;11:595–604.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ramirez PT, Pareja R, Rendon GJ, Millan C, Frumovitz M, Schmeler KM. Management of low-risk early-stage cervical cancer: should conization, simple trachelectomy, or simple hysterectomy replace radical surgery as the new standard of care? Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132(1):254–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Kokka F, Bryant A, Brockbank E, Jeyarajah A. Surgical management of stage 1A2 cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;5:CD010870. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010870.pub2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. National Cancer Institute. Cervical cancer treatment–for health professionals (PDQ). General information about cervical cancer. Available at: http://www.cancer.gov/types/cervical/hp/cervical-treatment-pdq. Accessed 25 Aug 2015.

  22. Landoni F, Maneo A, Zapardiel I, Zanagnolo V, Mangioni C. Class I versus class III radical hysterectomy in stage IBI–IIB cervical cancer. a prospective randomized study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012;38:203–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wright JD, Grigsby PW, Brooks R, Powell MA, Gibb RK, Gao F, et al. Utility of parametrectomy for early stage cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy. Cancer. 2007;110(6):1281–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Frumovitz M, Sun CC, Schmeler KM, Deavers MT, dos Reis R, Levenback CF, et al. Parametrial involvement in radical hysterectomy specimens for women with early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(1):93–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Covens A, Rosen B, Murphy J, Laframboise S, DePetrillo AD, Lickrish G, et al. How important is removal of the parametrium at surgery for carcinoma of the cervix? Gynecol Oncol. 2002;84(1):145–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee JY, Youm J, Kim JW, Cho JY, Kim MA, Kim TH, et al. Identifying a low-risk group for parametrial involvement in microscopic stage 1B1 cervical cancer using criteria from ongoing studies and a new MRI criterion. BMC Cancer. 2015;15(1):167–73.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Plante M. A Randomized Trial comparing Radical Hysterectomy and Pelvic Node Dissection vs Simple Hysterectomy and Pelvic Node Dissection in Patients with Low Risk Early Stage Cervical Cancer. NCIC Clinical Trials Group. NCT016589309.ClinicalTrials.gov The SHAPE Trial; 2013. Radical surgical treatment has been highly effective at curing women of early cervical cancer; however living with the consequences of such surgery has prompted the first randomised control Phase 3 trial to assess survival, morbidity from treatment and quality of life in patients undergoing simple versus radical hysterectomy and pelvic node dissection.

  28. Schmeler KM, Frumovitz M, Ramirez PT. Conservative management of early stage cervical cancer:is there a role for less radical surgery? Gynecol Oncol. 2011;120:321–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Covens A. GOG Protocol. 278 http://www.gcig.igcs.org/Spring2012/2012_june_cervix_cancer_committee.pdf. Accessed 29 Sept 2015.

  30. Lecuru F, Mathevet P, Querleu D, LeBlanc E, Morice P, Darai E, et al. Bilateral negative sentinel nodes accurately predict absence of lymph node metastasis in early cervical cancer: results of the SENTICOL study. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(13):1686–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bats AS, Frati A, Froissart M, Orliaguet I, Querleu D, Zerdoud S, et al. Feasibility and performance of lymphoscintigraphy in sentinel lymph node biopsy for early cervical cancer: results of the prospective multicentre SENTICOL study. Ann Nucl Med. 2015;29:63–70. Undergoing pelvic lymphadenectomy leaves a woman at risk of chronic lymphoedema. Sentinel node mapping appears to be feasible and safe in women with early stage cervical cancer. Further studies are required to assess if it may be used to reduce pelvic lymph node dissection in selected cases.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Van der Zee AG, Oonk MH, De Hullu JA, Ansink AC, Vergote I, Verheijen RH, et al. Sentinel node dissection is safe in the treatment of early-stage vulvar cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:884–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Baalbergen A, Veenstra Y, Stalpers L. Primary surgery versus primary radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy for early adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;1:CD006248. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006248.pub3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Selman TJ, Mann C, Zamora J, Appleyard TL, Khan K. Diagnostic accuracy of tests for lymph node status in primary cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can Med Assoc J. 2008;178(7):855–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kesic V. Management of cervical cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32(8):832–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Robova H, Halaska MJ, Pluta M, Skapa P, Matecha J, Lisy J, et al. Oncological and pregnancy outcomes after high-dose density neoadjuvant chemotherapy and fertility-sparing surgery in cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;135:213–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Bergmark K, Åvall‐Lundqvist E, Dickman PW, Henningsohn L, Steineck G. Lymphedema and bladder‐emptying difficulties after radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer and among population controls. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16(3):1130–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gynaecological Oncology, G18, Sheffield Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield, S10 2JF, UK

    Madeleine C. Macdonald & John A. Tidy

Authors
  1. Madeleine C. Macdonald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John A. Tidy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Madeleine C. Macdonald.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Madeleine C. Macdonald and John A. Tidy declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Gynecologic Cancers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Macdonald, M.C., Tidy, J.A. Can We Be Less Radical with Surgery for Early Cervical Cancer?. Curr Oncol Rep 18, 16 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-016-0501-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-016-0501-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation