Cervical adenocarcinoma is known to be less common than squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix comprising approximately 25% of all cervical carcinomas. Differences in associated human papillomavirus types, patterns of spread, and prognosis call for treatments that are not always like those for squamous cancers. In this review, we report a consensus developed by the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup surrounding cervical adenocarcinoma for epidemiology, pathology, treatment, and unanswered questions. Prospective clinical trials are needed to help develop treatment guidelines.
Key points Differences between adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, and
Individualization of the therapy
- Cervical Cancer
- Clinical management
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Isabelle Ray Coquard, MD has served on the board of, and received grant funding from, Roche Pharmaceuticals. She has also received payment for lectures from Amgen. Bradley J. Monk, MD has served as a consultant for Qiagen, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Arno Therapeutics, Insys Therapeutics, Tesaro, Celgene, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Roche/Genentech. He has also received grant funding from Novartis, Amgen, Genentech, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals/Johnson & Johnson, Array BioPharma, and Tesaro, and has received payment for lectures from Roche/Genentech and Johnson & Johnson. Keiichi Fujiwara, MD, PhD has served as a consultant for Zeria Pharmaceutical, GlaxoSmithKline, and Eisai, and has received payment for lectures from Taiho Pharmaceutical and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest.