Background As part of its mission to improve the quality of care for women with gynecological cancers across Europe, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) first published in 2017 evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with vulvar cancer. Objective To update the ESGO guidelines based on the new evidence addressing the management of vulvar cancer and to cover new topics in order to provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment of vulvar cancer. Methods The ESGO Council nominated an international development group comprised of practicing clinicians who provide care to vulvar cancer patients and have demonstrated leadership through their expertize in clinical care and research, national and international engagement and profile as well as dedication to the topics addressed to serve on the expert panel (18 experts across Europe). To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, new data identified from a systematic search were reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the international development group. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 206 international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. Results The updated guidelines cover comprehensively diagnosis and referral, staging, pathology, pre-operative investigations, surgical management (local treatment, groin treatment, sentinel lymph node procedure, reconstructive surgery), (chemo)radiotherapy, systemic treatment, treatment of recurrent disease (vulvar, inguinal, pelvic, and distant recurrences), and follow-up. Management algorithms are also defined.

Background and Aim Worldwide, 1,470,900 women are diagnosed yearly with a gynecological malignancy (21,000 in the UK). Some patients treated with pelvic radiotherapy develop chronic changes in their bowel function. This systematic review summarizes current research on the impact of cancer treatment on the gut and vaginal microbiome in women with a gynecological malignancy. Methods The Preferred reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for systematic reviews were used to ensure transparent and complete reporting. Quantitative studies exploring the gut or vaginal microbiome in this patient cohort were included. Animal studies were excluded. There were no language restrictions. Results No studies examined the possible effects of surgery or chemotherapy for gynecological cancers on the gut or vaginal microbiome. Three prospective cohort studies were identified using sequencing of changes in the gut microbiome reporting on a total of 23 women treated for gynecological cancer. All studies included patients treated with radiotherapy with a dosage ranging from 43.0 to 54.0 Gy. Two studies assessed gastrointestinal toxicity formally; 8 women (57%) developed grade 2 or 3 diarrhea during radiotherapy. The outcomes suggest a correlation between changes in the intestinal microbiome and receiving radiotherapy and showed a decrease in abundance and diversity of the intestinal bacterial species. Before radiotherapy, those who developed diarrhea had an increased abundance of Bacteroides, Dialister, and Veillonella (P < 0.01), and a decreased abundance of Clostridium XI and XVIII, Faecalibacterium, Oscillibacter, Parabacteroides, Prevotella, and unclassified bacteria (P < 0.05). Conclusion The limited evidence to date implies that larger studies including both the vaginal and gut microbiome in women treated for a gynecological malignancy are warranted to explore the impact of cancer treatments on the microbiome and its relation to developing long-term gastrointestinal toxicity. This may lead to new avenues to stratify those at risk and explore personalized treatment options and prevention of gastrointestinal consequences of cancer treatments.

These guidelines have been developed jointly by the British Gynaecological Cancer Society and British Menopause Society to provide information for all healthcare professionals managing women treated for gynaecological cancer. Menopausal symptoms can have a significant impact on quality of life for women. Cancer therapies, including surgery, pelvic radiotherapy, chemotherapy and endocrine therapy, can all affect ovarian function. The benefits and risks of using hormone replacement therapy are considered by cancer type with guidance on the type of HRT and optimal time of commencement after cancer treatment. Vaginal estrogens can be very effective for improving urogenital symptoms and are safe for the majority of women, including those for whom systemic HRT is contraindicated with rare exceptions. Alternative options to HRT are reviewed including pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches.

IGRT in cervical cancer treatment delivery is complex due to significant target and organs at risk (OAR) motion. Implementing image assessment of soft-tissue target and OAR position to improve accuracy is recommended. We report the development and refinement of a training and competency programme (TCP), leading to on-line Radiation Therapist (RTT) led soft-tissue assessment, evaluated by a prospective audit. The TCP comprised didactic lectures and practical sessions, supported by a comprehensive workbook. The content was decided by a team comprised of Clinical Oncologists, RTTs, and Physicists. On completion of training, RTT soft-tissue review proficiency (after bony anatomy registration) was assessed against a clinician gold-standard from a database of 20 cervical cancer CBCT images. Reviews were graded pass or fail based on PTV coverage assessment and decision taken in concordance with the gold-standard. Parity was set at ≥80% agreement.The initial TCP (stage one) focussed on offline verification and decision making. Sixteen RTTs completed this stage, four achieved ≥80%. This was not sufficient to support clinical implementation.The TCP was redesigned, more stringent review guidelines and greater anatomy teaching was added. TCP stage two focussed on online verification and decision making supported by a decision flowchart. Twenty-one RTTs completed this TCP, all achieved ≥80%. This supported clinical implementation of RTT-led soft-tissue review under prospective audit conditions.The prospective audit was conducted between March 2017 and August 2017. Daily online review was performed by two trained RTTs. Online review and decision making proficiency was evaluated by a clinician. Thirteen patients were included in the audit. Daily online RTT-led IGRT was achieved for all 343 fractions. Two-hundred CBCT images were reviewed offline by the clinician; the mean number of reviews per patient was 15. 192/200 (96%) RTT image reviews were in agreement with clinician review, presenting excellent concordance. Multidisciplinary involvement in training development, redesign of the TCP and inclusion of summative competency assessment were important factors to support RTT skill development. Consequently, RTT-led cervical cancer soft-tissue IGRT was clinically implemented in the hospital.