Objective Management of endometrial cancer is advancing, with accurate staging crucial for guiding treatment decisions. Understanding sentinel lymph node (SLN) involvement rates across molecular subgroups is essential. To evaluate SLN involvement in early-stage (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 I–II) endometrial cancer, considering molecular subtypes and new European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) risk classification. Methods The SENECA study retrospectively reviewed data from 2139 women with stage I–II endometrial cancer across 66 centers in 16 countries. Patients underwent surgery with SLN assessment following ESGO guidelines between January 2021 and December 2022. Molecular analysis was performed on pre-operative biopsies or hysterectomy specimens. Results Among the 2139 patients, the molecular subgroups were as follows: 272 (12.7%) p53 abnormal (p53abn, 1191 (55.7%) non-specific molecular profile (NSMP), 581 (27.2%) mismatch repair deficient (MMRd), 95 (4.4%) POLE mutated (POLE-mut). Tracer diffusion was detected in, at least one side, in 97.2% of the cases; with a bilateral diffusion observed in 82.7% of the cases. By ultrastaging (90.7% of the cases) or one-step nucleic acid amplification (198 (9.3%) of the cases), 205 patients were identified with affected sentinel lymph nodes, representing 9.6% of the sample. Of these, 139 (67.8%) had low-volume metastases (including micrometastases, 42.9%; and isolated tumor cells, 24.9%) while 66 (32.2%) had macrometastases. Significant differences in SLN involvement were observed between molecular subtypes, with p53abn and MMRd groups having the highest rates (12.50% and 12.40%, respectively) compared with NSMP (7.80%) and POLE-mut (6.30%), (p=0.004); (p53abn, OR=1.69 (95% CI 1.11 to 2.56), p=0.014; MMRd, OR=1.67 (95% CI 1.21 to 2.31), p=0.002). Differences were also noted among ESGO risk groups (2.84% for low-risk patients, 6.62% for intermediate-risk patients, 21.63% for high–intermediate risk patients, and 22.51% for high-risk patients; p<0.001). Conclusions Our study reveals significant differences in SLN involvement among patients with early-stage endometrial cancer based on molecular subtypes. This underscores the importance of considering molecular characteristics for accurate staging and optimal management decisions.

PURPOSE: To evaluate atezolizumab combined with platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) followed by maintenance niraparib for late-relapsing recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: The multicenter placebo-controlled double-blind randomized phase III ENGOT-OV41/GEICO 69-O/ANITA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03598270 ) enrolled patients with measurable high-grade serous, endometrioid, or undifferentiated recurrent ovarian cancer who had received one or two previous CT lines (most recent including platinum) and had a treatment-free interval since last platinum (TFIp) of >6 months. Patients were stratified by investigator-selected carboplatin doublet, TFIp, BRCA status, and PD-L1 status in de novo biopsy and randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either atezolizumab or placebo throughout standard therapy comprising six cycles of a carboplatin doublet followed (in patients with response/stable disease) by maintenance niraparib until progression. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Between November 2018 and January 2022, 417 patients were randomly assigned (15% BRCA- mutated, 36% PD-L1–positive, 66% TFIp >12 months, 11% previous poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase inhibitor after frontline CT, and 53% previous bevacizumab). Median follow-up was 28.6 months (95% CI, 26.6 to 30.5 months). Atezolizumab did not significantly improve PFS (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.71 to 1.10]; P = .28). Median PFS was 11.2 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 12.1 months) with atezolizumab versus 10.1 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.2 months) with standard therapy. Subgroup analyses generally showed consistent results, including analyses by PD-L1 status. The objective response rate (ORR) was 45% (95% CI, 39 to 52) with atezolizumab and 43% (95% CI, 36 to 49) with standard therapy. The safety profile was as expected from previous experience of these drugs. CONCLUSION: Combining atezolizumab with CT and maintenance niraparib for late-relapsing recurrent ovarian cancer did not significantly improve PFS or the ORR.

Cervical cancer (CC) is the fourth most common cancer and the fourth leading cause of mortality in women worldwide. It is strongly associated with high-risk human papillomavirus infection. High-income countries that have implemented human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and screening programs have seen dramatic reductions in CC incidence, while developing countries where these programs are not available continue to experience high rates of CC deaths. In early-stage CC, the primary treatment is surgery or radiotherapy, whereas concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) remains the conventional approach in locally advanced stages until the upcoming approval of immunotherapy. The incorporation of immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy (with or without bevacizumab) in first line and as monotherapy in second line after platinum-based chemotherapy, has significantly increased overall survival (OS) in recurrent or metastatic CC. The purpose of this guideline is to summarize the most relevant evidence in the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of CC and to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice.

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is still the most lethal gynecological cancer. Germline alterations in breast cancer 1 (gBRCA1) and breast cancer 2 (gBRCA2) genes have been identified in up to 18% of women diagnosed with EOC, and somatic mutations are found in an additional 7%. Testing of BRCA at the primary diagnosis of patients with EOC is recommended due to the implications in the genomic counseling of the patients and their families, as well as for the therapeutic implications. Indeed, the introduction of poly-(ADP ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) has changed the natural history of patients harboring a mutation in BRCA, and has resulted in a new era in the treatment of patients with ovarian cancer harboring a BRCA mutation.

Metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer remains a significant clinical challenge with a poor prognosis. The introduction of anti-HER2 therapies has significantly improved survival in early and advanced stages. However, patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer eventually experience progression due to de novo or acquired resistance. This review article comprehensively analyzes the current management of metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer, addressing the complexities in determining the optimal HER2-targeted therapy sequence. Discussion of selected peer-reviewed articles and expert opinion. We explore the actual standard of care and the emerging therapeutic options that hold promise for further improving patient care and survival in this aggressive breast cancer subtype. This article highlights vital toxicities linked to anti-HER2 therapies, emphasizing their recognition across treatments as interstitial lung disease, diarrhea, or left ventricular dysfunction. Oncology nurses have a key role to play in detecting potential adverse effects of anti-HER2 therapies. The development of new drugs, as antibody-drug conjugates, with a distinct toxicity profile makes it necessary for us to be updated on the management of these new toxicities.