Purpose Endometrial carcinoma in the lower uterine segment (LUS) is a poorly described cancer that can be clinically confused with endocervical carcinoma. We performed a case-comparison study to document the clinicopathologic characteristics of LUS tumors and their association with risk factors for endometrial cancer. Patients and Methods The clinical records and pathology reports from women who underwent hysterectomy at our institution for endometrial or endocervical adenocarcinoma over an 11-year interval were reviewed. The LUS group consisted of women with endometrial tumors that clearly originated between the lower uterine corpus and the upper endocervix. Immunohistochemistry and microsatellite instability and MLH1 methylation assays were performed. Results Thirty-five (3.5%) of 1,009 women had endometrial carcinoma of the LUS. Compared with patients with corpus tumors, LUS patients were younger, had higher stage tumors, and had more invasive tumors. Preoperative diagnosis of the LUS tumors more frequently included the possibility of endocervical adenocarcinoma. Seventy-three percent of the LUS tumors had an immunohistochemical expression pattern typical of conventional endometrioid adenocarcinoma. Ten (29%) of 35 women with LUS tumors were confirmed to have Lynch syndrome or were strongly suspected to have Lynch syndrome on the basis of tissue-based molecular assays. Conclusion The prevalence of Lynch syndrome in patients with LUS endometrial carcinoma (29%) is much greater than that of the general endometrial cancer patient population (1.8%) or in endometrial cancer patients younger than age 50 years (8% to 9%). On the basis of our results, the possibility of Lynch syndrome should be considered in women with LUS tumors.

OBJECTIVE To estimate the incidence of genetic counseling referral for ovarian cancer patients who are at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. METHODS An analysis was performed of new ovarian cancer patients who were seen at a comprehensive cancer center from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2007. Patients at substantial (more than 20–25%) risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation were identified and records reviewed for referral to genetic counseling. Time to referral was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS A total of 3,765 epithelial ovarian cancer patients were seen during the 9-year period. On average, 23.8% of patients met substantial-risk criteria for BRCA mutations. In 1999, only 12% of patients at substantial-risk were referred. Referral improved over time with 48% referred in 2007 (P<.001). Newly diagnosed patients were more often referred for genetic counseling than new patients with recurrent disease or those seen as second opinions. African-American women meeting substantial-risk criteria were less likely to be referred than were white or Hispanic women (P=.009). CONCLUSION Although dictated family history was accurate, interpretation of risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and subsequent referral to genetic counseling was poor. Although there was significant improvement over time, 50% of substantial-risk patients still were missed. Systematic efforts to identify those ovarian cancer patients at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 are necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

Purpose While overall survival from gynecologic malignancies has greatly improved over the last 3 decades, required treatments can lead to multiple health issues for survivors. Our objective was to identify health concerns that gynecologic cancer survivors face. Methods A systematic, stratified sample of women with gynecologic malignancies was surveyed for 18 health issues occurring before, during, or after treatment. The impact of clinical features and treatment modality on health issues was assessed through multivariate logistic regression models. Results Of 2,546 surveys mailed, 622 were not received by eligible subjects secondary to invalid address, incorrect diagnosis, or death. Thus, 1,924 survivors potentially received surveys. Of the 1,029 surveys (53.5%) completed, median age was 59 years; diagnoses included 29% cervical, 26% endometrial, 26% ovarian/primary peritoneal/fallopian tube, 12.1% vulvar, and 5.4% vaginal cancers. The most frequently reported health issues included: fatigue (60.6%), sleep disturbance (54.9%), urinary difficulties (50.9%), sexual dysfunction (48.4%), neurologic issues (45.4%), bowel complaints (42.0%), depression (41.3%), and memory problems (41.2%). These rankings were consistent with patients’ self-reported rankings of “highest impact” personal issues. After controlling for demographic and clinical variables, multivariate analyses revealed treatment modality impacted the odds of experiencing a given health issue. Conclusions Our study demonstrates gynecologic cancer survivors experience a high frequency of health conditions and highlights the association between treatment modality and specific health concerns. Implications for Cancer Survivors The study findings highlight the multiple health concerns experienced by gynecologic cancer survivors and suggest the potential for developing interventions to mitigate these concerns in survivorship.

No abstract

Objectives Few women with ovarian cancer undergo genetic testing for the Breast and Ovarian Cancer susceptibility genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2. With the prospect of BRCA-directed therapeutics, we investigated ovarian cancer patients’ knowledge and willingness to undergo genetic testing. Methods All ovarian cancer patients seen in the Gynecology Center of a Cancer Center and a private clinic were asked to complete an anonymous questionnaire regarding knowledge and willingness to undergo BRCA testing. Women who had prior genetic testing were asked not to participate. Data was analyzed using Fisher’s exact test. Results Two-hundred and thirty seven ovarian cancer patients voluntarily completed the questionnaire. Fifty-five percent (131/237) of participants had not heard of BRCA testing. Of Caucasian respondents, 51% were unaware of BRCA testing, compared to 70% of Hispanic and 88% of African American respondents (p= 0.008). Awareness was correlated with education (p<0.001). Eighty-nine percent of participants were willing to be tested if it would directly affect their therapy and 86.9% would be tested to benefit their family. Seventy-four percent of patients would pay 20% of the cost of testing, only 25.1% would pay in full. Conclusions A majority of women with ovarian cancer are not aware of the availability of BRCA testing. This lack of awareness is more profound in minorities. Despite lack of knowledge, most patients would undergo testing if it would impact their care. However, cost may be a barrier. Given the willingness of patients to undergo testing and the possibility of targeted therapy, clinicians who care for these patients should work to make appropriate genetic counseling referrals.