PURPOSE: The Groningen International Study on Sentinel nodes in Vulvar cancer (GROINSS-V)-II investigated whether inguinofemoral radiotherapy is a safe alternative to inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy (IFL) in vulvar cancer patients with a metastatic sentinel node (SN). METHODS: GROINSS-V-II was a prospective multicenter phase-II single-arm treatment trial, including patients with early-stage vulvar cancer (diameter < 4 cm) without signs of lymph node involvement at imaging, who had primary surgical treatment (local excision with SN biopsy). Where the SN was involved (metastasis of any size), inguinofemoral radiotherapy was given (50 Gy). The primary end point was isolated groin recurrence rate at 24 months. Stopping rules were defined for the occurrence of groin recurrences. RESULTS: From December 2005 until October 2016, 1,535 eligible patients were registered. The SN showed metastasis in 322 (21.0%) patients. In June 2010, with 91 SN-positive patients included, the stopping rule was activated because the isolated groin recurrence rate in this group went above our predefined threshold. Among 10 patients with an isolated groin recurrence, nine had SN metastases > 2 mm and/or extracapsular spread. The protocol was amended so that those with SN macrometastases (> 2 mm) underwent standard of care (IFL), whereas patients with SN micrometastases (≤ 2 mm) continued to receive inguinofemoral radiotherapy. Among 160 patients with SN micrometastases, 126 received inguinofemoral radiotherapy, with an ipsilateral isolated groin recurrence rate at 2 years of 1.6%. Among 162 patients with SN macrometastases, the isolated groin recurrence rate at 2 years was 22% in those who underwent radiotherapy, and 6.9% in those who underwent IFL ( P = .011). Treatment-related morbidity after radiotherapy was less frequent compared with IFL. CONCLUSION: Inguinofemoral radiotherapy is a safe alternative for IFL in patients with SN micrometastases, with minimal morbidity. For patients with SN macrometastasis, radiotherapy with a total dose of 50 Gy resulted in more isolated groin recurrences compared with IFL.

Background The efficacy of adjuvant radiotherapy in patients with intermediate risk early cervical cancer after radical hysterectomy is still under debate. Most guidelines recommend adjuvant radiotherapy, whereas others consider observation a viable option. Objective To investigate if patients with intermediate risk factors for cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy may benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy. Methods Consecutive patients with tumor confined to the cervix and intermediate risk factors (according to Sedlis), treated between January 1982 and December 2014 who were observed after a type C2 radical hysterectomy formed the basis for this study. The frequency of recurrences, specifically isolated loco-regional recurrences, and the risk of death from recurrences, were analyzed. Data were analyzed using SPSS, version 23.0 for Windows Results A total of 161 patients were included in the analysis. Median age was 40 (range 20–76). Stages IB1 and IB2 were seen in 87 (54%) and 74 patients (46%), respectively. Squamous cell and non-squamous histology was seen in 114 (70.8%) and 47 patients (29.2%), respectively. Of the 161 patients, 25 (15.5%) had recurrent disease, of whom nine had an isolated loco-regional recurrence (5.6%). Median time to recurrence for isolated loco-regional recurrences was 28 months (range 9–151). Treatment for an isolated loco-regional recurrence was radiotherapy (n = 4) and chemoradiotherapy (n = 5). Four patients (2.5%) died from disease as a result of an isolated loco-regional recurrence. Actuarial disease- specific survival was 93.0% for the total group. No variables were found that predicted an isolated loco-regional recurrence. Discussion The mortality from isolated loco-regional recurrence in patients with intermediate risk factors for cervical cancer who underwent only radical hysterectomy type C2 was 2.5%. Further studies should compare outcomes between patients who undergo a type C2 radical hysterectomy without adjuvant radiotherapy with those undergoing a less radical hysterectomy but with adjuvant radiotherapy.

Objective Treatment strategies for bulky lymph nodes in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer scheduled for definitive chemoradiation include nodal boosting with radiotherapy, surgical debulking, or both. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare survival and toxicity in patients receiving these treatments and to compare them with a group that received neither form of treatment. Methods Women diagnosed between January 2009 and January 2017 with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IB2, IIA2–IVA cervical cancer with lymph nodes ≥1.5 cm without upper limit on pretreatment imaging and treated with definitive chemoradiation were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were categorized by intention-to-treat strategy: boosting, debulking, or neither treatment, with subgroup analysis for patients receiving both treatments, that is, debulking with boosting. Overall and relapse-free survival outcomes were compared by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses and toxicity by logistic regression analysis. Results Of 190 patients, 101 (53%) received only nodal boosting, 31 (16%) debulking alone, 29 (15%) debulking combined with boosting, and 29 (15%) received neither treatment. The 5 year overall and relapse-free survival for the treatment groups were 58%, 45% and 45% (p=0.19), and 47%, 44% and 46% (p=0.87), respectively. Multivariable Cox regression analyses demonstrated no differences in overall and relapse-free survival. Combination of debulking with boosting was associated with decreased overall and relapse-free survival compared with debulking alone (HR 2.47, 95% CI 1.22 to 5.00; and HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.93). Nodal boosting was independently associated with a decreased toxicity risk compared with debulking strategy (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.83). Conclusions This study showed no survival benefit from either nodal boosting or debulking strategy in patients with suspicious bulky nodes. Nodal boosting might, however, be associated with less toxicity. Dual treatment with debulking and boosting showed a worse survival outcome because this group probably represents patients with poor prognostic factors.