Investigator

Ritchie Delara

Gynecologic Surgical Oncology · Mayo Clinic Hospital, Department of Medical and Surgical Gynecology

RDRitchie Delara
Papers(2)
Surgical or imaging l…Comparing survival ou…
Collaborators(4)
Kristina ButlerSkye Buckner-PettyJie YangPaul Magtibay
Institutions(2)
Mayo ClinicPeking Union Medical …

Papers

Surgical or imaging lymph node assessment in locally advanced cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate the survival impact of imaging vs surgical nodal assessment in patients with cervical cancer stage IB2-IVA prior to definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT). PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were used to search for publications in English and Chinese over a 50-year period. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols was used to conduct this review. Inclusion criteria were studies that compared survival outcomes in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 stage IB2-IVA cervical cancer patients with pre-therapy pelvic and/or aortic lymphadenectomy (LND) or imaging. One or more of the following modalities were used for nodal assessment: computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging, or positron emission tomography-CT. The National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool was utilized to assess study quality. The initial search identified 65 studies, and five met the inclusion criteria. There were a total of 1,112 patients. Seven hundred and fifty-four underwent pelvic and/or aortic LND and 358 had imaging. When compared to LND, imaging had a sensitivity and specificity of 88.9% and 22.2% for pelvic lymph node (LN), and 33%-62.5% and 92%-95.5% for para-aortic LN. There were no differences in progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR]=1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.73-1.74; I²=75%; p<0.01) and overall survival (OS) (HR=1.06; 95% CI=0.66-1.69; I²=75%; p<0.01) between surgical and imaging nodal assessment. Imaging and surgical nodal assessment has comparable PFS and OS in patients with cervical cancer stage IB2-IVA. PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020155486.

Comparing survival outcomes between surgical and radiographic lymph node assessment in locally advanced cervical cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis

To investigate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between women who underwent surgical versus radiographic assessment of pelvic lymph nodes (PLN) and para-aortic lymph nodes (PALN) prior to chemoradiation therapy for cervical cancer. In this retrospective cohort analysis, patients with stage IB2 - IIIB squamous cell, adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix who completed concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) between 2000 and 2017 from the Mayo Clinic Cancer Registry were identified. A 1:2 propensity score matching between surgical and imaging groups was performed and PFS and OS were compared between groups. 148 patients were identified and after propensity score matching, 35 from the surgical group and 70 from the imaging group were included in the analysis. There were no statistical differences in baseline characteristics between the 2 groups. The median follow-up time was 41 months (range 7-218) for the surgical group and 51.5 months (range 7-198) for the imaging group. Five-year PFS was 62.6% for the surgical group and 72.4% in imaging group (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.54-2.30, p = 0.77). Five-year OS was 70.2% for the surgical group and 70.5% for the imaging group (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.46-2.29, p = 0.96). FIGO stage, PALN metastasis, and parametrial involvement were found to be poor prognosticators for PFS and OS in univariate analysis. Only PALN metastasis significantly predicted unfavorable PFS (HR 2.76, 95% CI 1.23-6.18, p = 0.01) and OS (HR 3.46, 95% CI 1.40-8.55, p = 0.01) in multivariate analysis. There were no differences in locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis between the two groups (p = 0.33 and 0.59 respectively). Patients with cervical cancer who underwent radiographic assessment of PLN and PALN had comparable survival outcomes to surgical assessment.

2Papers
4Collaborators
1Trials

Positions

2025–

Gynecologic Surgical Oncology

Mayo Clinic Hospital · Department of Medical and Surgical Gynecology

2022–

Fellow, Gynecologic Oncology

Levine Cancer Institute · Division of Gynecologic Oncology

2020–

Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgeon

University of Colorado - Anschutz Medical Campus · Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology

2018–

Fellow, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery

Mayo Clinic · Department of Medical and Surgical Gynecology

2014–

Resident Physician

Cleveland Clinic Akron General · Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Country

US

Keywords
gynecologic oncologyminimally invasive surgery
Links & IDs
0000-0002-2770-2155

Scopus: 57194462892

Researcher Id: AAA-3369-2020