Perceptions of Controversies and Unresolved Issues in the 2014 FIGO Staging System for Endometrial Cancer: Survey Results From Members of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists and International Gynecologic Cancer Society

Abstract

Long-standing controversial and unresolved issues in the current “International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics” staging system for endometrial cancer are well-recognized by pathologists and clinicians alike and exist primarily as a result of limitations to the existing literature. To guide the design of future outcome-based studies specifically aimed at resolving such gaps, the International Society of Gynecologic Pathologists developed a survey of the current perceptions of pathologists (n = 172) and clinicians (n= 135) from the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists and from the International Gynecologic Cancer Society on areas for potential refinement of the current International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system. The highest priority issues for pathologists and clinicians alike were the need to determine whether stage IIIA patients (ovarian/fallopian tube involvement) can be reliably separated into favorable versus unfavorable outcome groups to avoid over-treatment of the former group and to determine whether stage IIIC patients (lymph node metastases) can be separated into favorable versus unfavorable outcome groups based on the size of lymph node metastases. The majority of pathologists and clinicians viewed lymphovascular space invasion as an independent prognostic variable and favored incorporating lymphovascular space invasion into staging, though the level of support did not meet the threshold of 75% in support that we used to define a formal consensus. While pathologists did agree on the prognostic value of reporting the extent of lymphovascular space invasion, there was no consensus on the diagnostic criteria to distinguish focal versus substantial involvement. The majority of pathologists and clinicians viewed that a universally accepted protocol for sentinel lymph node ultra-staging is lacking. Both survey groups conveyed a slight preference for incorporating tumor histotype and molecular classification into staging but the support was short of the 75% threshold for formal consensus. Collectively, this survey permits the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists to develop a pathologist and clinician-driven long-term strategy for prioritizing and designing outcome-based studies specifically targeted to resolving controversial and unresolved issues in the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging of endometrial cancer.