Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. The aim of this study was to compare overall survival between open and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with participants followed for 4.5 years. The primary objective was to evaluate whether minimally invasive surgery was noninferior in disease-free survival (DFS) to abdominal radical hysterectomy. Secondary outcomes included overall survival. Sample size was based on DFS of 90% at 4.5 years and 7.2% noninferiority margin for minimally invasive surgery. A total of 631 patients were enrolled: 319 assigned to minimally invasive and 312 to open surgery. Of these, 289 (90.6%) patients underwent minimally invasive surgery and 274 (87.8%) patients open surgery. At 4.5 years, DFS was 85.0% in the minimally invasive group and 96% in the open group (difference of –11.1; 95% CI, –15.8 to –6.3; P = .95 for noninferiority). Minimally invasive surgery was associated with lower rate of DFS compared with open surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 3.91 [95% CI, 2.02 to 7.58]; P < .001). Rate of overall survival at 4.5 years was 90.6% versus 96.2% for the minimally invasive and open surgery groups, respectively (HR for death of any cause = 2.71 [95% CI, 1.32 to 5.59]; P = .007). Given higher recurrence rate and worse overall survival with minimally invasive surgery, an open approach should be standard of care.

Cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates are significantly higher in low- and middle-income countries compared with the United States and other developed countries. This disparity is caused by decreased access to screening, often coupled with low numbers of trained providers offering cancer prevention and treatment services. However, similar disparities are also found in underserved areas of the United States, such as the Texas-Mexico border, where cervical cancer mortality rates are 30% higher than in the rest of Texas. To address these issues, we have adopted the Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) program, a low-cost telementoring model previously proven to be successful in increasing local capacity, improving patient management skills, and ultimately improving patient outcomes in rural and underserved areas. We use the Project ECHO model to educate local providers in the management of cervical dysplasia in a low-resource region of Texas and have adapted it to inform strategies for the management of advanced cervical and breast cancer in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. This innovative approach, using ECHO, is part of a larger strategy to enhance clinical skills and develop collaborative projects between academic centers and partners in low-resource regions.

PURPOSE: The objective of this review was to address the barriers limiting access to genetic cancer risk assessment and genetic testing for individuals with suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) through a review of the diagnosis and management steps of HBOC.METHODS: A selected panel of Brazilian experts in fields related to HBOC was provided with a series of relevant questions to address before the multiday conference. During this conference, each narrative was discussed and edited by the entire group, through numerous drafts and rounds of discussion, until a consensus was achieved.RESULTS: The authors propose specific and realistic recommendations for improving access to early diagnosis, risk management, and cancer care of HBOC specific to Brazil. Moreover, in creating these recommendations, the authors strived to address all the barriers and impediments mentioned in this article.CONCLUSION: There is a great need to expand hereditary cancer testing and counseling in Brazil, and changing current policies is essential to accomplishing this goal. Increased knowledge and awareness, together with regulatory actions to increase access to this technology, have the potential to improve patient care and prevention and treatment efforts for patients with cancer across the country.