Surgical resection with free surgical margins is the cornerstone of successful primary treatment of vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC). In general reexcision is recommended when the minimum... Show moreSurgical resection with free surgical margins is the cornerstone of successful primary treatment of vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC). In general reexcision is recommended when the minimum peripheral surgical margin (MPSM) is <8 mm microscopically. Pathologists are, therefore, required to report the minimum distance from the tumor to the surgical margin. Currently, there are no guidelines on how to make this measurement, as this is often considered straightforward. However, during the 2018 Annual Meeting of the British Association of Gynaecological Pathologists (BAGP), a discussion on this topic revealed a variety of opinions with regard to reporting and method of measuring margin clearance in VSCC specimens. Given the need for uniformity and the lack of guidance in the literature, we initiated an online survey in order to deliver a consensus-based definition of peripheral surgical margins in VSCC resections. The survey included questions and representative diagrams of peripheral margin measurements. In total, 57 pathologists participated in this survey. On the basis of consensus results, we propose to define MPSM in VSCC as the minimum distance from the peripheral edge of the invasive tumor nests toward the inked peripheral surgical margin reported in millimeters. This MPSM measurement should run through tissue and preferably be measured in a straight line. Along with MPSM, other relevant measurements such as depth of invasion or tumor thickness and distance to deep margins should be reported. This manuscript provides guidance to the practicing pathologist in measuring MPSM in VSCC resection specimens, in order to promote uniformity in measuring and reporting. Show less
Introduction: The revised Dutch colorectal cancer guideline (2014), led to an overall decrease in preoperative radiotherapy (RT) use. This study evaluates hospital variation in RT use for... Show moreIntroduction: The revised Dutch colorectal cancer guideline (2014), led to an overall decrease in preoperative radiotherapy (RT) use. This study evaluates hospital variation in RT use for resectable rectal cancer and the influence of guideline revision, including the nationwide impact of changing RT application on short term outcomes.Methods: Data of surgically resected rectal cancer patients registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit were extracted between 2011 and 2017. Patients were divided into groups based on time of guideline revision (<2014 and >= 2014). Primary outcome was guideline adherence at hospital level regarding RT application, stratified for three stage groups. Secondary outcomes included positive circumferential resection (CRM+) and 30-day complicated postoperative course.Results: The groups consisted of 7364 and 12,057 patients, respectively. In total, 6772 patients did not receive RT (17.6% (<2014) vs. 45.7% (>= 2014), p < 0.001). The largest increase of surgery alone was observed for cT1-2N0 stage rectal cancer (35.1% vs. 91.8%, p < 0.001), with a substantial decrease in hospital variation (IQR 22.2-50.0% vs. IQR 87.6-98.0%). For cT1-3N1MRF-stage rectal cancer, a substantial amount of hospital variation in short course RT remained after guideline revision (IQR 26.8-54.1% vs. IQR 26.2-50.0%). A significant decrease in CRMthorn (5.8% vs. 4.2%, p < 0.001) and complicated course (22.5% vs. 18.5%, p < 0.001) was observed.Conclusions: Radiotherapy for early-stage rectal cancer was uniformly abandoned after guideline revision, while substantial hospital variation remained for intermediate risk resectable rectal cancer in the Netherlands. The substantial nationwide decrease in the use of RT for rectal cancer treatment did not negatively impact CRM involvement. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved. Show less
