With the widespread use of routine abdominal ultrasound examination during pregnancy, adnexal masses are observed with increasing frequency. Most patients are clinically asymptomatic at the time of presentation, and most of the adnexal masses detected during early pregnancy disappear during the first 16 weeks of pregnancy. Ovarian tumors are estimated to occur in about 1 in 1,000 pregnancies and of these 3% are malignant. Here we present an overview about frequency, diagnostic procedures and pathological characteristics of these ovarian tumors. Moreover, current modalities for treatment during pregnancy are summarized. Surgical treatment of the adnexal masses has to be performed with adequate staging and debulking equal to the treatment of non-pregnant women. However, whereas during organogenesis abortion has to be considered prior to chemotherapy, later in pregnancy surgical debulking as complete as possible, followed by taxol-platinum chemotherapy is indicated. If the fetus is not viable at the time of primary surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and complementation of surgery after delivery of the baby should be performed. It should be stressed that chemotherapy for ovarian cancer applied during pregnancy appears to be safe. However, no studies have evaluated the long-term consequences for children exposed to intra-uterine chemotherapy. Aspiration of cysts should be avoided, as the correlation between the histological evaluation of an ovarian malignancy and the cytological evaluation of aspirates is poor. Moreover, spillage of malignant cysts is hazardous for the patient.

Background: Some countries have implemented stand-alone human papillomavirus (HPV) testing while others consider cotesting for cervical cancer screening. We compared both strategies within a population-based study. Methods: The MARZY cohort study was conducted in Germany. Randomly selected women from population registries aged ≥30 years (n = 5,275) were invited to screening with Pap smear, liquid-based cytology (LBC, ThinPrep), and HPV testing (Hybrid Capture2, HC2). Screen-positive participants [ASC-US+ or high-risk HC2 (hrHC2)] and a random 5% sample of screen-negatives were referred to colposcopy. Post hoc HPV genotyping was conducted by GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA with reverse line blotting. Sensitivity, specificity (adjusted for verification bias), and potential harms, including number of colposcopies needed to detect 1 precancerous lesion (NNC), were calculated. Results: In 2,627 screened women, cytological sensitivities (Pap, LBC: 47%) were lower than HC2 (95%) and PCR (79%) for CIN2+. Cotesting demonstrated higher sensitivities (HC2 cotesting: 99%; PCR cotesting: 84%), but at the cost of lower specificities (92%–95%) compared with HPV stand-alone (HC2: 95%; PCR: 94%) and cytology (97% or 99%). Cotesting versus HPV stand-alone showed equivalent relative sensitivity [HC2: 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.00–1.21; PCR: 1.07, 95% CI, 1.00–1.27]. Relative specificity of Pap cotesting with either HPV test was inferior to stand-alone HPV. LBC cotesting demonstrated equivalent specificity (both tests: 0.99, 95% CI, 0.99–1.00). NNC was highest for Pap cotesting. Conclusions: Cotesting offers no benefit in detection over stand-alone HPV testing, resulting in more false positive results and colposcopy referrals. Impact: HPV stand-alone screening offers a better balance of benefits and harms than cotesting. See related commentary by Wentzensen and Clarke, p. 432

Cancer screening itself and abnormal test results have an impact on patient's feelings. To reduce the psychological impact, patients need to be better informed about the risks and benefits of cancer screening programs and in case of cervical cancer screening about the meaning of an abnormal test result. Our results underline the importance of a trustful physician-patient relationship in that matter.

Leukemia in pregnancy is a rare condition with the prevalence of 1 in 75,000-100,000 pregnancies. In this case report, we present a successful multidisciplinary management strategy for treatment and for preserving the reproductive potential in a rare case of acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL) during pregnancy. Several complex challenges existed and necessitated a multidisciplinary approach with strong coordination and collaboration between oncologists, gynecologists, reproductive cryobiologists, obstetricians, and neonatologists in order to improve the maternal and fetal outcome. Pregnancy in the second trimester is neither a contraindication for ALL treatment nor for emergency fertility preservation via ovarian tissue extraction and further cryopreservation.

In this cohort we demonstrated that resection of more than six LNs per groin does not improve the recurrence rates in patients with carcinoma of the vulva. Further prospective studies with more individuals are needed to evaluate the role of resected LNs in vulvar carcinoma.