Michael J. Halaska

Background: Ectopic pregnancy (EP) remains a significant cause of maternal morbidity and mortality, with diverse clinical presentations and substantial variability in treatment strategies. Objectives: To assess current EP management approaches across gynecological inpatient departments of all sizes in the Czech Republic. Design: A nationwide cross-sectional observational questionnaire study. Methods: A survey was conducted in January 2025. All 92 registered inpatient gynecological wards in the Czech Republic were invited to participate in an anonymous online questionnaire on EP diagnosis and treatment. A total of 89 departments (96.7%) responded. Facilities were grouped into four categories based on annual hysterectomy volume. Statistical analyses included chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests with adjustments for multiple comparisons. Results: Methotrexate (MTX) was available in 82.8% of high-volume centers, compared with 48.3% of smaller facilities ( p = 0.002). Despite this, 46.1% of institutions reported never using MTX. The use of MTX for all types of EP was significantly more common in larger centers (72.4% versus 45.0%, p = 0.023), although its use for tubal EP remained generally low (18.0%) with no significant difference by center size. Surgical treatment of tubal EP was consistently preferred by 36.0% of facilities, and 38.2% of surgeons occasionally performed salpingotomy. Laparoscopy was the dominant approach for interstitial pregnancies (86.5%), with universal adoption in high-volume centers ( p = 0.007). Suction and curettage were most commonly used for cesarean scar (47.2%) and cervical (60.7%) pregnancies, although treatment strategies varied considerably. Observational management was preferred in pregnancy of unknown location with declining human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) levels (83.2%), while diagnostic laparoscopy was favored when hCG levels plateaued or rose (57.3%). Conclusion: EP management, even within a country with a homogeneous healthcare system, may demonstrate considerable heterogeneity, strongly influenced by institutional size. These findings highlight the need for national guidelines to ensure standardized and evidence-based care.

Introduction: Vulvovaginal cancer in pregnancy is rare. Limited data complicate decision‐making and patient counseling. Our review, coupled with new case data, fills a current gap in the literature and provides practical insights. Material and Methods: Oncological and obstetric data of these pregnancies were examined by a case collection from the International Network on Cancer, Infertility and Pregnancy (INCIP) registry (vulvar n = 10, vaginal n = 5) and a literature review (vulvar n = 46, vaginal n = 37). Results: Although preoperative imaging of inguinofemoral lymph nodes is feasible, only 16.1% of vulvar cancer patients underwent ultrasound or MRI. Treatment was initiated during pregnancy for 69.1% of vulvar cancer and 28.4% of vaginal cancer patients. Surgical lymph node staging of vulvar cancer was postponed until after delivery in 10 cases, although uni‐ or bilateral lymphadenectomy during pregnancy was not associated with more complications. Delivery outcomes included a live birth rate of 96.4% for vulvar cancer and 50% for vaginal cancer due to the high rate of pregnancy terminations, with most births preterm. The overall 5‐year survival rates for vulvar (81.3%) and vaginal (66.4%) cancer during pregnancy are comparable to nonpregnant populations, indicating that pregnancy does not adversely impact maternal prognosis. Conclusions: This study underscores the feasibility of adapting standard oncological care for pregnant patients, emphasizing multidisciplinary teams to optimize maternal and fetal outcomes.

The International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) introduced a new staging system for endometrial carcinoma FIGO 2023 in June 2023. The new staging system differs significantly from previous versions by incorporating other non-anatomical parameters (histological type of tumour, tumour grade and the presence of massive lymphovascular space involvement as well as the molecular classification of the tumour). The FIGO 2023 staging system enhances the accuracy of prognostic assessments for patients at a specific stage with better options for targeted treatment. Another objective was to synchronise staging as much as possible with the European oncogynaecological ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma established in 2021. However, several changes are controversial. Routine molecular classification of endometrial carcinomas is not yet commonly available in most countries of the world. Another limitation of the FIGO 2023 staging system of endometrial cancer is the inclusion of variables whose definitions are still evolving, as well as variables that are subject to considerable interobserver variability in their assessment. Advantages, controversies, and limitations for clinical practice of the new FIGO 2023 endometrial cancer staging system are discussed.

The clinical relevance of combined chemotherapy and immunotherapy in mouse models of TMBLo and TMBHi ovarian cancer. A and B, Bar plots showing single-nucleotide variants positions (SNVs) (A) and the somatic mutations prevalence (mutations per megabase) (B) in ID8 (n = 3) and Brca1−/−Trp53−/−/Myc/Hras SO1 (n = 3) C57BL/6 syngeneic mouse ovarian cancer cell lines. Mean and SEM are shown. Statistical significance was calculated by multiple t test. P values are indicated. C, Experimental design for the analysis of TLS aggregates development and efficacy of combined chemotherapy and aPD1 and/or aTIM-3 therapy in TMBLo ID8 and TMBHi SO1 experimental syngeneic mouse models. D and E, Representative immunostaining for CD4, CD8, CD20, and CD21 (D) and a box plot showing density of TLS aggregates within chemo-naïve (n = 5) and treated TMBHi SO1 (n = 9) ovarian tumors (E). Scale bars, 100 µm and 2.5 mm. Box plots: lower quartile, median, upper quartile; whiskers, minimum, maximum. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. F–H, Representative dot plot (F) and flow cytometry analyses for percentages of CD62L+CD44+ central memory (CM) and CD62L−CD44− terminally differentiated CD8+ T cells (TEMRA) (G) and TCF1+PD1+CD8+ and TIM-3+PD1+CD8+ T cells (H) in tumor samples of the TMBHi SO1 experimental model in the presence or absence of carboplatin and taxane chemotherapy (NACT). Box plots: lower quartile, median, upper quartile; whiskers, minimum, maximum. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. I and J, Overall survival (OS) of TMBHi SO1 experimental model (I) and flow cytometry analyses for percentage of TCF1+PD1+CD8+ T cells after NACT, aPD1, aTIM-3 and combined therapy (J). Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method, and differences between groups were evaluated using log-rank test. Box plots: lower quartile, median, upper quartile; whiskers, minimum, maximum. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. K and L, Representative immunostaining for CD4, CD8, CD20, and CD21 (K) and a box plot showing density of TLS aggregates within chemo-naïve (n = 8) and treated TMBLo ID8 (n = 8) (L) ovarian tumors. Scale bars, 100 µm and 2.5 mm. Box plots: lower quartile, median, upper quartile; whiskers, minimum, maximum. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. M, Flow cytometry analyses for TCF1+PD1+CD8+ and TIM-3+PD1+CD8+ T cells in tumor samples of the TMBLo ID8 experimental model in the presence or absence of carboplatin and taxane chemotherapy (NACT). Box plots: lower quartile, median, upper quartile; whiskers, minimum, maximum. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. N, Overall survival (OS) of TMBLo ID8 experimental model after NACT, anti-PD1, and combined therapy. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method, and differences between groups were evaluated using log-rank test. P values are indicated. (Panel C created with BioRender.com.)

NACT-mediated progenitor TCF1+PD1+CD8+ T-cell phenotype associates with effector cytotoxic functions within metastatic HGSOC. A–C, Representative dot plot (A) and box plot (B) showing percentage of TIM-3+PD1+CD8+ T cells and GZMB+CD8+ T cells within native pTME and mTME of chemo-naïve and treated HGSOC as determined by flow cytometry. Box plots: lower quartile, median, upper quartile; whiskers, minimum, maximum. Statistical significance was calculated by the Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. C, Marker heatmap dot plots obtained after t-SNE and showing the relative expression of the indicated marker in the different phenotypic clusters within mTME of chemo-naïve and treated HGSOS as determined by flow cytometry. D, Design of experimental and sequencing workflow in 11 patients with HGSOC before and after NACT. scRNAseq was performed on dissociated solid tumor specimens using 10× Genomics Chromium platform. E and F, Uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP) plot of all cells (n = 51,476) passing the quality control, colored by type of therapy (E) and cell type (F). G and H, TILs projections (G) and predicted subtype frequencies (H) in biopsies from patients with chemo-naïve and treated HGSOC. CM, central memory; EM, effector memory; MAIT, mucosal-associated invariant T cells; PTEX, progenitor exhausted T cells; TEMRA, terminally exhausted T cells; TEX, exhausted T cells. I and J, Radar plot showing percentage of CD8+ T cells expressing respective T-cell marker (KLRB1, TCF7, CCR7, IL7R, LMNA, FGFBP2, XCL1, CD200, CRTAM, TOX, PDCD1, HAVCR2, and GNLY; I) and UMAP showing expression of PDCD1, HAVCR2 and TCF7 in CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell clusters in chemo-naïve and treated HGSOC samples (study cohort 5; J), as determined by scRNA-seq. (Panel D created with BioRender.com.)

NACT-mediated adjuvanticity positively impacts clinically relevant TLS maturation in metastatic HGSOC. A, Representative image of immunofluorescence of CD4, CD8, CD20, CD21, CD23, DC-LAMP, and GZMB staining (immunofluorescence panel 1). Scale bars, 10, 100 and 500 µm. B and C, Distribution of early TLS (eTLS; B) and mature TLS (mTLS; C) across pTME and mTME HGSOC tumor samples with/without NACT. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. D, Supervised hierarchical clustering of TLS-relevant gene signature (CCL2, CCL3, CCL4, CCL5, CCL8, CCL18, CCL19, CCL21, CXCL9, CXCL10, CXCL11, and CXCL13) across pTME and mTME HGSOC tumor samples with/without NACT. E and F, Overall survival (OS) of 60 (E) and 40 chemo-naïve and treated patients with mHGSOC (F), respectively (study cohort 1 and 2) based on median stratification of total mTLS. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method, and differences between groups were evaluated using log-rank test. Number of patients at risk and P values are reported. G, Number of mTLS across patients with CALRLo and CALRHi mHGSOC with/without NACT as determined by median stratification. Mean and SEM are shown. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. H and I, OS of 60 and 40 patients with chemo-naïve and treated mHGSOC (study cohorts 1 and 2), upon stratification based on median frequency of mTLS and expression of CALR. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method, and differences between groups were evaluated using the log-rank test.

Immunomodulation by NACT in metastatic HGSOC. A, Representative images of CALR immunostaining in CALRLo and CALRHi patients. Scale bars, 10 and 100 µm. B, CALR expression levels determined by immunostaining and (C) ER stress signature level [expression level of DNA damage inducible transcript 3 (DDIT3, best known as CHOP), heat shock protein family A (Hsp70) member 5 (HSPA5, best known as BIP), and heat shock protein 90 beta family member 1 (HSP90B1)] as determined by RNA-seq in pTME and mTME HGSOC with/without NACT. Box plots: lower quartile, median, upper quartile; whiskers, minimum, maximum. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. D, Supervised hierarchical clustering of gene signatures related to immune populations (orange), immune functions (blue) and immune phenotype (purple) as determined by RNA-seq data from pTME and mTME HGSOC tumor samples with/without NACT. IS, immunosuppression; mDCs, myeloid dendritic cells; NK cells, natural killer cells; TLS, tertiary lymphoid structures. E, Gene expression signature associated with CD8+ T cells, B cells, cytotoxicity, mDCs, TLS, and immunosuppression as determined on RNA-seq data from pTME and mTME HGSOC with/without NACT. Box plots: lower quartile, median, upper quartile; whiskers, minimum, maximum. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. F, Representative image of CD20/DC-LAMP double immunostaining. Scale bars, 500 and 100 µm. G, Density of CD8+ T cells, CD20+ B cells, and DC-LAMP+ cells as determined by immunostaining in pTME and mTME HGSOC samples with/without NACT. Mean and SEM are shown. Statistical significance was calculated by two-sided Mann–Whitney test. P values are indicated. ns, not significant.