Optimal treatment in locally advanced cervical cancer

References

• Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbyn M, Weiderpass E, Bruni L, et al. Estimates of incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in 2018: a worldwide analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(2):e191–e203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen PA, Jhingran A, Oaknin A, et al. Cervical cancer. Lancet. 2019;393(10167):169–182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paavonen J, Naud P, Salmerón J, et al. Efficacy of human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine against cervical infection and precancer caused by oncogenic HPV types (PATRICIA): final analysis of a double-blind, randomised study in young women. Lancet. 2009;374(9686):301–314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villa LL, Perez G, Kjaer SK, et al. Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent high-grade cervical lesions. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(19):1915–1927.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joura EA, Giuliano AR, Iversen OE, et al. A 9-valent HPV vaccine against infection and intraepithelial neoplasia in women. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(8):711–723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ronco G, Dillner J, Elfström KM, et al. Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials. Lancet. 2014;383(9916):524–532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adegoke O, Kulasingam S, Virnig B. Cervical cancer trends in the United States: a 35-year population-based analysis. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2012;21(10):1031–1037.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zappa M, Visioli CB, Ciatto S, et al. Lower protection of cytological screening for adenocarcinomas and shorter protection for younger women: the results of a case-control study in Florence. Br J Cancer. 2004;90(9):1784–1786.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cibula D, Pötter R, Planchamp F, et al. The European society of gynaecological oncology/European society for radiotherapy and oncology/European society of pathology guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018;28(4):641–655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bae HS, Kim YJ, Lim MC, et al. Predictors of radiation field failure after definitive chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016;26(4):737–742.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramlov A, Kroon PS, Jürgenliemk-Schulz IM, et al. Impact of radiation dose and standardized uptake value of (18)FDG PET on nodal control in locally advanced cervical cancer. Acta Oncol. 2015;54(9):1567–1573.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klopp AH, Eifel PJ. Biological predictors of cervical cancer response to radiation therapy. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2012;22(2):143–150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose PG, Java J, Whitney CW, et al. Nomograms predicting progression-free survival, overall survival, and pelvic recurrence in locally advanced cervical cancer developed from an analysis of identifiable prognostic factors in patients from NRG oncology/gynecologic oncology group randomized trials of chemoradiotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(19):2136–2142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li P, Tan Y, Zhu LX, et al. Prognostic value of HPV DNA status in cervical cancer before treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget. 2017;8(39):66352–66359.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wang CC, Lai CH, Huang HJ, et al. Clinical effect of human papillomavirus genotypes in patients with cervical cancer undergoing primary radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;78(4):1111–1120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin YC, Chen YC, Chen RY, et al. Genomic biomarkers of survival in patients with adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix receiving chemoradiotherapy. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(11):4117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gadducci A, Guerrieri ME, Greco C. Tissue biomarkers as prognostic variables of cervical cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2013;86(2):104–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Lu S, Lan M, et al. A prognostic nomogram integrating novel biomarkers identified by machine learning for cervical squamous cell carcinoma. J Transl Med. 2020;18(1):223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network; Albert Einstein College of Medicine; Analytical Biological Services et al. Integrated genomic and molecular characterization of cervical cancer. Nature. 2017 Mar 16;543:(7645)378–384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhatla N, Berek JS, Cuello Fredes M, et al. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2019;145(1):129–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corrigendum to “Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri” [Int J Gynecol Obstet 145 (2019)129-135]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2019 Nov;147(2):279–280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grigsby PW, Massad LS, Mutch DG, et al. FIGO 2018 staging criteria for cervical cancer: impact on stage migration and survival. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;157(3):639–643.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright JD, Matsuo K, Huang Y, et al. Prognostic performance of the 2018 International federation of gynecology and obstetrics cervical cancer staging guidelines. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;134(1):49–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsuo K, Machida H, Mandelbaum RS, et al. Validation of the 2018 FIGO cervical cancer staging system. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;152(1):87–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McComas KN, Torgeson AM, Ager BJ, et al. The variable impact of positive lymph nodes in cervical cancer: implications of the new FIGO staging system. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;156(1):85–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haldorsen IS, Lura N, Blaakær J, et al. What is the role of imaging at primary diagnostic work-up in uterine cervical cancer? Curr Oncol Rep. 2019;21(9):77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomeer MG, Gerestein C, Spronk S, et al. Clinical examination versus magnetic resonance imaging in the pretreatment staging of cervical carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2013 Jul;23(7):2005–2018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoth J, Pötter R, Jürgenliemk-Schulz IM, et al. Clinical and imaging findings in cervical cancer and their impact on FIGO and TNM staging - An analysis from the EMBRACE study. Gynecol Oncol. 2020 Oct;159(1):136–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen G, Zhou H, Jia Z, et al. Diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted MRI for detection of pelvic metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Radiol. 2015;88(1052):20150063.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hameeduddin A, Sahdev A. Diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in assessing response and recurrent disease in gynaecological malignancies. Cancer Imaging. 2015;15(1):3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Atri M, Zhang Z, Dehdashti F, et al. Utility of PET-CT to evaluate retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis in advanced cervical cancer: results of ACRIN6671/GOG0233 trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;142(3):413–419.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang S, Kim SK, Chung DC, et al. Diagnostic value of (18)F-FDG PET for evaluation of paraaortic nodal metastasis in patients with cervical carcinoma: a metaanalysis. J Nucl Med. 2010;51(3):360–367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brockbank E, Kokka F, Bryant A, et al. Pre-treatment surgical para-aortic lymph node assessment in locally advanced cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2013(3):CD008217.
   Google Scholar
• Martinez A, Voglimacci M, Lusque A, et al. Tumour and pelvic lymph node metabolic activity on FDG-PET/CT to stratify patients for para-aortic surgical staging in locally advanced cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020;47(5):1252–1260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Cuypere M, Lovinfosse P, Goffin F, et al. Added value of para-aortic surgical staging compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT on the external beam radiation field for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer: an ONCO-GF study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020;46(5):883–887.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gouy S, Morice P, Narducci F, et al. Prospective multicenter study evaluating the survival of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer undergoing laparoscopic para-aortic lymphadenectomy before chemoradiotherapy in the era of positron emission tomography imaging. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(24):3026–3033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai CH, Huang KG, Hong JH, et al. Randomized trial of surgical staging (extraperitoneal or laparoscopic) versus clinical staging in locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;89(1):160–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marnitz-Schulze S, Tsunoda A, Martus P, et al. Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB-IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus - 11) intergroup study. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020 Dec; 30(12): 1855–1861.
   Google Scholar
• Frumovitz M, Querleu D, Gil-Moreno A, et al. Lymphadenectomy in locally advanced cervical cancer study (LiLACS): phase III clinical trial comparing surgical with radiologic staging in patients with stages IB2-IVA cervical cancer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(1):3–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gee MS, Atri M, Bandos AI, et al. Identification of distant metastatic disease in uterine cervical and endometrial cancers with FDG PET/CT: analysis from the ACRIN 6671/GOG 0233 multicenter trial. Radiology. 2018;287(1):176–184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz JK, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, et al. Metabolic response on post-therapy FDG-PET predicts patterns of failure after radiotherapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;83(1):185–190.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lima GM, Matti A, Vara G, et al. Prognostic value of posttreatment (18)F-FDG PET/CT and predictors of metabolic response to therapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with concomitant chemoradiation therapy: an analysis of intensity- and volume-based PET parameters. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45(12):2139–2146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scher N, Castelli J, Depeursinge A, et al. (18F)-FDG PET/CT parameters to predict survival and recurrence in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy. Cancer Radiothér. 2018;22(3):229–235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeung AR, Pugh SL, Klopp AH, et al. Improvement in patient-reported outcomes with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (RT) compared with standard RT: a report from the NRG oncology RTOG 1203 study. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(15):1685–1692.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin Y, Chen K, Lu Z, et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for definitive treatment of cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. Radiat Oncol. 2018;13(1):177.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lin AJ, Kidd E, Dehdashti F, et al. Intensity modulated radiation therapy and image-guided adapted brachytherapy for cervix cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019;103(5):1088–1097.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guy JB, Falk AT, Auberdiac P, et al. Dosimetric study of volumetric arc modulation with RapidArc and intensity-modulated radiotherapy in patients with cervical cancer and comparison with 3-dimensional conformal technique for definitive radiotherapy in patients with cervical cancer. Med Dosim. 2016;41(1):9–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan LT, Tanderup K, Kirisits C, et al. Image-guided adaptive radiotherapy in cervical cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2019;29(3):284–298.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charra-Brunaud C, Harter V, Delannes M, et al. Impact of 3D image-based PDR brachytherapy on outcome of patients treated for cervix carcinoma in France: results of the French STIC prospective study. Radiother Oncol. 2012;103(3):305–313.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelnau-Marchand P, Chargari C, Maroun P, et al. Clinical outcomes of definitive chemoradiation followed by intracavitary pulsed-dose rate image-guided adaptive brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;139(2):288–294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pötter R, Georg P, Dimopoulos JC, et al. Clinical outcome of protocol based image (MRI) guided adaptive brachytherapy combined with 3D conformal radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2011;100(1):116–123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sturdza A, Pötter R, Fokdal LU, et al. Image guided brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: improved pelvic control and survival in RetroEMBRACE, a multicenter cohort study. Radiother Oncol. 2016;120(3):428–433.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen NBK, Pötter R, Kirchheiner K, et al. Bowel morbidity following radiochemotherapy and image-guided adaptive brachytherapy for cervical cancer: physician- and patient reported outcome from the EMBRACE study. Radiother Oncol. 2018;127(3):431–439.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fokdal L, Pötter R, Kirchheiner K, et al. Physician assessed and patient reported urinary morbidity after radio-chemotherapy and image guided adaptive brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2018;127(3):423–430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pötter R, Tanderup K, Kirisits C, et al. The EMBRACE II study: the outcome and prospect of two decades of evolution within the GEC-ESTRO GYN working group and the EMBRACE studies. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2018;9:48–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Liu R, Ma B, et al. High dose rate versus low dose rate intracavity brachytherapy for locally advanced uterine cervix cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;2010(7):CD007563.
   Google Scholar
• Tanderup K, Fokdal LU, Sturdza A, et al. Effect of tumor dose, volume and overall treatment time on local control after radiochemotherapy including MRI guided brachytherapy of locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2016;120(3):441–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pötter R, Dimopoulos J, Georg P, et al. Clinical impact of MRI assisted dose volume adaptation and dose escalation in brachytherapy of locally advanced cervix cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2007;83(2):148–155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill BS, Lin JF, Krivak TC, et al. National cancer data base analysis of radiation therapy consolidation modality for cervical cancer: the impact of new technological advancements. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90(5):1083–1090.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han K, Milosevic M, Fyles A, et al. Trends in the utilization of brachytherapy in cervical cancer in the United States. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;87(1):111–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris M, Eifel PJ, Lu J, et al. Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high-risk cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(15):1137–1143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose PG, Bundy BN, Watkins EB, et al. Concurrent cisplatin-based radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(15):1144–1153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keys HM, Bundy BN, Stehman FB, et al. Cisplatin, radiation, and adjuvant hysterectomy compared with radiation and adjuvant hysterectomy for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(15):1154–1161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitney CW, Sause W, Bundy BN, et al. Randomized comparison of fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus hydroxyurea as an adjunct to radiation therapy in stage IIB-IVA carcinoma of the cervix with negative para-aortic lymph nodes: a gynecologic oncology group and southwest oncology group study. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(5):1339–1348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters WA 3rd, Liu PY, Barrett RJ 2nd, et al. Concurrent chemotherapy and pelvic radiation therapy compared with pelvic radiation therapy alone as adjuvant therapy after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage cancer of the cervix. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(8):1606–1613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer Meta-Analysis Collaboration. Reducing uncertainties about the effects of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 18 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(35):5802–5812.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration (CCCMAC). Reducing uncertainties about the effects of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: individual patient data meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;2010(1):CD008285.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Datta NR, Stutz E, Liu M, et al. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy vs. radiotherapy alone in locally advanced cervix cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145(2):374–385.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmid MP, Franckena M, Kirchheiner K, et al. Distant metastasis in patients with cervical cancer after primary radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy and image guided adaptive brachytherapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;133(2):256–262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Escande A, Khettab M, Bockel S, et al. Interaction between the number of chemotherapy cycles and brachytherapy dose/volume parameters in locally advanced cervical cancer patients. J Clin Med. 2020;9(6):1653.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrelli F, De Stefani A, Raspagliesi F, et al. Radiotherapy with concurrent cisplatin-based doublet or weekly cisplatin for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;134(1):166–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma S, Wang J, Han Y, et al. Platinum single-agent vs. platinum-based doublet agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;154(1):246–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu J, Zhang Z, Bian D, et al. Weekly versus triweekly cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced cervical carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99(1):e18663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nam EJ, Lee M, Yim GW, et al. Comparison of carboplatin- and cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer patients with morbidity risks. Oncologist. 2013;18(7):843–849.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xue R, Cai X, Xu H, et al. The efficacy of concurrent weekly carboplatin with radiotherapy in the treatment of cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2018;150(3):412–419.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domingo E, Lorvidhaya V, de Los Reyes R, et al. Capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy with adjuvant capecitabine for locally advanced squamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix: phase II results. Oncologist. 2009;14(8):828–834.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi CH, Lee YY, Kim MK, et al. A matched-case comparison to explore the role of consolidation chemotherapy after concurrent chemoradiation in cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81(5):1252–1257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang MQ, Liu SP, Wang XE. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with paclitaxel and nedaplatin followed by consolidation chemotherapy in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix: preliminary results of a phase II study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;78(3):821–827.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorvidhaya V, Chitapanarux I, Sangruchi S, et al. Concurrent mitomycin C, 5-fluorouracil, and radiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix: a randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55(5):1226–1232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dueñas-González A, Zarbá JJ, Patel F, et al. Phase III, open-label, randomized study comparing concurrent gemcitabine plus cisplatin and radiation followed by adjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin versus concurrent cisplatin and radiation in patients with stage IIB to IVA carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(13):1678–1685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dueňas-González A, Orlando M, Zhou Y, et al. Efficacy in high burden locally advanced cervical cancer with concurrent gemcitabine and cisplatin chemoradiotherapy plus adjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin: prognostic and predictive factors and the impact of disease stage on outcomes from a prospective randomized phase III trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;126(3):334–340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tangjitgamol S, Katanyoo K, Laopaiboon M, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy after concurrent chemoradiation for locally advanced cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Dec 3;2014(12):CD010401.
   Google Scholar
• Tang J, Tang Y, Yang J, et al. Chemoradiation and adjuvant chemotherapy in advanced cervical adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;125(2):297–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tangjitgamol S, Tharavichitkul E, Tovanabutra C, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing concurrent chemoradiation versus concurrent chemoradiation followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer patients: ACTLACC trial. J Gynecol Oncol. 2019;30(4):e82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahmoud O, Einstein MH. Which patients with cervical squamous cell carcinoma might benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy? J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(16):1543–1547.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rydzewska L, Tierney J, Vale CL, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery versus surgery for cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;2012(1):CD007406.
   Google Scholar
• Kim HS, Sardi JE, Katsumata N, et al. Efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with FIGO stage IB1 to IIA cervical cancer: an International collaborative meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39(2):115–124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao H, He Y, Yang SL, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with radical surgery vs radical surgery alone for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Onco Targets Ther. 2019;12:1881–1891.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 21 randomised trials. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39(17):2470–2486.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta S, Maheshwari A, Parab P, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery versus concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with stage IB2, IIA, or IIB squamous cervical cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(16):1548–1555.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenter G, Greggi S, Vergote I, et al. Results from neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery compared to chemoradiation for stage Ib2-IIb cervical cancer, EORTC 55994. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(15_suppl):5503.
   Google Scholar
• de Azevedo CR, Thuler LC, de Mello MJ, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation in cervical carcinoma: a review. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016;26(4):729–736.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verma J, Monk BJ, Wolfson AH. New strategies for multimodality therapy in treating locally advanced cervix cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2016;26(4):344–348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tewari KS, Sill MW, Long HJ 3rd, et al. Improved survival with bevacizumab in advanced cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(8):734–743.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schefter T, Winter K, Kwon JS, et al. RTOG 0417: efficacy of bevacizumab in combination with definitive radiation therapy and cisplatin chemotherapy in untreated patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;88(1):101–105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen AC, Roane BM, Leath CA 3rd. Novel therapeutics for recurrent cervical cancer: moving towards personalized therapy. Drugs. 2020;80(3):217–227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang W, Lu YP, Yang YZ, et al. Expressions of programmed death (PD)-1 and PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical squamous cell carcinomas are of prognostic value and associated with human papillomavirus status. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2017;43(10):1602–1612.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayadev J, Nunes AT, Li M, et al. CALLA: efficacy and safety of concurrent and adjuvant durvalumab with chemoradiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy alone in women with locally advanced cervical cancer: a phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020;30(7):1065–1070.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basu P, Mehta A, Jain M, et al. A randomized phase 2 study of ADXS11-001 listeria monocytogenes-listeriolysin o immunotherapy with or without cisplatin in treatment of advanced cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018;28(4):764–772.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayor P, Starbuck K, Zsiros E. Adoptive cell transfer using autologous tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in gynecologic malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 2018;150(2):361–369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jazaeri AA, Zsiros E, Amaria RN, et al. Safety and efficacy of adoptive cell transfer using autologous tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (LN-145) for treatment of recurrent, metastatic, or persistent cervical carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(15):2538.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunos CA, Andrews SJ, Moore KN, et al. Randomized phase II trial of triapine- cisplatin-radiotherapy for locally advanced stage uterine cervix or vaginal cancers. Front Oncol. 2019;9:1067.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katanyoo K, Sanguanrungsirikul S, Manusirivithaya S. Comparison of treatment outcomes between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma in locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;125(2):292–296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He L, Wu L, Su G, et al. The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in different histological types of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;134(2):419–425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee JY, Kim YT, Kim S, et al. Prognosis of cervical cancer in the era of concurrent chemoradiation from National database in Korea: a comparison between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. PLoS One. 2015;10(12):e0144887.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose PG, Java JJ, Whitney CW, et al. Locally advanced adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinomas of the cervix compared to squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix in gynecologic oncology group trials of cisplatin-based chemoradiation. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;135(2):208–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valduvieco I, Biete A, Rios I, et al. Correlation between clinical findings and magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of local response after standard treatment in cervical cancer. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2013;18(4):214–219.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vincens E, Balleyguier C, Rey A, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in predicting residual disease in patients treated for stage IB2/II cervical carcinoma with chemoradiation therapy: correlation of radiologic findings with surgicopathologic results. Cancer. 2008;113(8):2158–2165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houvenaeghel G, Lelievre L, Gonzague-Casabianca L, et al. Long-term survival after concomitant chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery in advanced cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;100(2):338–343.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azria E, Morice P, Haie-Meder C, et al. Results of hysterectomy in patients with bulky residual disease at the end of chemoradiotherapy for stage IB2/II cervical carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(4):332–337.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morice P, Rouanet P, Rey A, et al. Results of the GYNECO 02 study, an FNCLCC phase III trial comparing hysterectomy with no hysterectomy in patients with a (clinical and radiological) complete response after chemoradiation therapy for stage IB2 or II cervical cancer. Oncologist. 2012;17(1):64–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrandina G, Ercoli A, Fagotti A, et al. Completion surgery after concomitant chemoradiation in locally advanced cervical cancer: a comprehensive analysis of pattern of postoperative complications. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(5):1692–1699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Touboul C, Uzan C, Mauguen A, et al. Prognostic factors and morbidities after completion surgery in patients undergoing initial chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. Oncologist. 2010;15(4):405–415.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cagetti LV, Zemmour C, Minsat M, et al. Lessons from radiochemotherapy and modern image-guided adaptive brachytherapy followed by hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;156(2):328–334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Cervical cancer (Version 1.2021).
   Google Scholar
• Kokka F, Bryant A, Brockbank E, et al. Hysterectomy with radiotherapy or chemotherapy or both for women with locally advanced cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 7;(4):CD010260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colombo PE, Bertrand MM, Gutowski M, et al. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for locally advanced cervical carcinoma (stages IIB, IIA and bulky stages IB) after concurrent chemoradiation therapy: surgical morbidity and oncological results. Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Sep;114(3):404–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marth C, Landoni F, Mahner S, et al. Cervical cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(suppl_4):iv72–iv83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman RH, Topek NH, Wall JA. Late irradiation changes in vaginal cytology. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1961;81:859–866.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elit L, Kennedy EB, Fyles A, et al. Follow-up for cervical cancer: a program in evidence-based care systematic review and clinical practice guideline update. Curr Oncol. 2016;23(2):109–118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergmark K, Avall-Lundqvist E, Dickman PW, et al. Vaginal changes and sexuality in women with a history of cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999 May 6;340(18):1383–1389.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schover LR, Fife M, Gershenson DM. Sexual dysfunction and treatment for early stage cervical cancer. Cancer. 1989 Jan 1;63(1):204–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korfage IJ, Essink-Bot ML, Mols F, et al. Health-related quality of life in cervical cancer survivors: a population-based survey. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Apr 1;73(5):1501–1509.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frumovitz M, Sun CC, Schover LR, et al. Quality of life and sexual functioning in cervical cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 20;23(30):7428–7436.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirchheiner K, Jürgenliemk-Schulz I, Haie-Meder C, et al. Patient-reported sexual frequency and vaginal functioning in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer following definitive radiochemotherapy and image-guided adaptive brachytherapy (EMBRACE study). Int J Gynecologic Cancer. 2019;29:A24–A26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoekman EJ, Broeders EABJ, Louwe LA, et al. Ovarian function after ovarian transposition and additional pelvic radiotherapy: A systematic review. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019 Aug;45(8):1328–1340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan A, Brennan D, Rees M, et al. Management of menopausal symptoms and ovarian function preservation in women with gynecological cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020 Oct 30:ijgc-2020-002032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar