Staging of Cervical Cancer: What has Changed?

Pradnya Changede
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-024-02054-9
2024-09-02
The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India
Abstract:In India, cervical cancer is the second most common cause of cancer-related fatalities and the fourth most common malignancy worldwide affecting women. India accounts for 25% of all cervical cancer-related deaths worldwide each year. The main drawbacks of clinical staging were the imprecise estimation of tumor size and the challenge of determining the involvement of pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes with the few studies that FIGO allowed to be done for staging of cancer cervix. The use of 2009 staging approach showed that when many cases were operated based only on clinical findings, they subsequently required adjuvant therapy; hence, treatment-related morbidity was negatively impacted by these errors. Changes have been made to the staging of cervical cancer according to the 2018 revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) guidelines. Correction to cancer of the cervix staging was published recently in 2024. The horizontal extent (lateral extent) of the disease is not taken into consideration for staging in cases of microinvasive disease. Three subgroups have been identified based on the stratification of tumor size: IB1 ≤ 2 cm, IB2 > 2– ≤ 4 cm, and IB3 > 4 cm. Pathology and imaging modalities are added to clinical diagnosis for staging of cancer cervix. The involvement of lymph nodes (LNs) is now classified based on pathology (p) or imaging (r) which specifies that lymph node involvement is diagnosed using pathology (p) or imaging (r). Stage IIIC has been added [IIIC1 (involvement of pelvic nodes) and IIIC2 (involvement of para-aortic nodes)] is assigned to the case in the event of lymph node positive status. Pathological assessment takes precedence over radiological and clinical findings. The involvement of vascular/lymphatic spaces should not change the staging. The lower staging should be assigned when there is doubt about stage. Overall, the revised FIGO staging of cancer cervix (2024) has a number of advantages, including the inclusion of imaging and pathology, tumor size and LN-based categorization. More studies on staging of cancer cervix in different populations using revised staging of cancer cervix will help to prognosticate use of this staging.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?