THE TAKEAWAY

In the article by Zola et al13 that accompanies this editorial, a randomized, pragmatic study of endometrial cancer surveillance demonstrated that in cohorts at low and high risk of cancer recurrence, an intensive surveillance regimen did not improve overall survival compared with a minimalist regimen. The trial results validate existing guidelines and suggest the potential for modifications to include even fewer pelvic examinations for all patients and consideration of limited imaging and laboratory testing in select high-risk patients. However, regarding cancer surveillance in this setting, less represents progress.

Conception and design: Amanda N. Fader

Collection and assembly of data: All authors

Data analysis and interpretation: All authors

Manuscript writing: All authors

Final approval of manuscript: All authors

Accountable for all aspects of the work: All authors

AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Surveillance Strategies in Endometrial Cancer Care: Why Less Represents Progress

The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/authors/author-center.

Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments).

Anna L. Beavis

Consulting or Advisory Role: Ethicon

Research Funding: Pfizer

Amanda N. Fader

Honoraria: Eisai, Merck, Onconova Therapeutics

Consulting or Advisory Role: Merck

No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.