Falcone F, et al. J Gynecol Oncol. 2016 Aug;28:e2. http://dx.doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2017.28.e2

The objective of this work is to assess the 5-year outcomes of patients undergoing conization for high-grade cervical lesions that simultaneously present as risk factors in the persistence of HPV infection and the positivity of surgical resection margins. This is a retrospective study evaluating patients undergoing conization for high-grade cervical lesions. All patients included had both positive surgical margins and experienced HPV persistence at 6 months. Associations were evaluated with Cox proportional hazard regression and summarized using hazard ratio (HR). The charts of 2966 patients undergoing conization were reviewed. Among the whole population, 163 (5.5%) patients met the inclusion criteria, being at high risk due to the presence of positive surgical margins and experiencing HPV persistence. Of 163 patients included, 17 (10.4%) patients developed a CIN2+ recurrence during the 5-year follow-up. Via univariate analyses, diagnosis of CIN3 instead of CIN2 (HR: 4.88 (95%CI: 1.10, 12.41); p = 0.035) and positive endocervical instead of ectocervical margins (HR: 6.44 (95%CI: 2.80, 9.65); p < 0.001) were associated with increased risk of persistence/recurrence. Via multivariate analyses, only positive endocervical instead of ectocervical margins (HR: 4.56 (95%CI: 1.23, 7.95); p = 0.021) were associated with worse outcomes. In this high-risk group, positive endocervical margins is the main risk factor predicting 5-year recurrence.

Falcone F, et al. J Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Jun;31:e74. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2020.31.e74

Background: Primary prevention through vaccination is a prophylactic approach aiming to reduce the risk of developing human papillomavirus (HPV)-related lesions. No mature and long-term data supported the adoption of vaccination in women undergoing conization. Methods: This is a retrospective multi-institutional study. Charts of consecutive patients undergoing conization between 2010 and 2014 were collected. All patients included had at least 5 years of follow-up. We compared outcomes of patients undergoing conization plus vaccination and conization alone. A propensity-score matching algorithm was applied in order to reduce allocation biases. The risk of developing recurrence was estimated using Kaplan-Meir and Cox hazard models. Results: Overall, charts of 1914 women were analyzed. The study group included 116 (6.1%) and 1798 (93.9%) women undergoing conization plus vaccination and conization alone, respectively. Five-year recurrence rate was 1.7% (n = 2) and 5.7% (n = 102) after conization plus vaccination and conization alone, respectively (p = 0.068). After the application of a propensity-score matching, we selected 100 patients undergoing conization plus vaccination and 200 patients undergoing conization alone. The crude number of recurrences was 2 (2%) and 11 (5.5%) for patients undergoing conization plus vaccination and conization alone, respectively (p = 0.231). Vaccination had no impact on persistent lesions (no negative examination between conization and new cervical dysplasia; p = 0.603), but reduced the risk of recurrent disease (patients who had at least one negative examination between conization and the diagnosis of recurrent cervical dysplasia; p = 0.031). Conclusions: Patients having vaccination experience a slightly lower risk of recurrence than women who had not, although not statistically significantly different. Further evidence is needed to assess the cost effectiveness of adopting vaccination in this setting.