Fabio Martinelli
Fabio Martinelli is the Director of the Gynecololgic Oncology Surgical Division at Humanitas Pio X and tenure-track Assistant Professor of Gynecology and Obstetrics at Humanitas University.
Former attending physician in the Department of Gynecologic Oncology at IRCCS Foundation - National Cancer Institute of Milan –Italy since 2012, when he graduated residency in Obstetrics and Gynecology from the University of Milan.
During his training attended at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center - Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine Department, at the Department of Gynaecology and Gynaecological Oncology of Kliniken-Essen-Mitte and at the Universidad Autonoma of Madrid.
His area of interest are: Gynecological Oncology, Gynecologic Malignancies Treatment (cervical, endometrial, ovarian and vulvar cancer and pre-invasive disease), Minimally invasive surgery in ob/gyn (Laparoscopy, Hysteroscopy), Cytoreductive surgery, Surgical techniques in gynecology, Sentinel node procedures, Laser surgery, Oncofertility, Fertility preservation in gynecologic cancers, HPV and colposcopy.
He is a European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) certified European Gynaecological Oncologist.
He was awarded the National Scientific Qualification for Associate and Full Professorship in Gynecology and Obstetric - Ministry of Education, University and Research (Italy)
He has been the 2021-2023 Italian National Representative (NATREP) at ENYGO (European Network of Young Gynaecologic Oncologists).
He is an Expert Evaluator EX2021D431400 at the European Commission Funding & Tenders and Member of the panel of Expert in Medical Devices at the European Commission (EU), since 2021.
He is an European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) member, an AAGL member and a participant in the AAGL’s oncology special interest group, member of Mario Negri Gynecologic Oncology Group (MaNGO), and past member of the Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) group and board member of the Italian Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SIOG).
He is Principal Investigator and investigator in several national and international research studies and protocols.
He has authored and co-authored more than 150 articles in peer-reviewed journals as well as various book chapters. He is a member of several editorial boards as well as a reviewer for indexed journals.
Former attending physician in the Department of Gynecologic Oncology at IRCCS Foundation - National Cancer Institute of Milan –Italy since 2012, when he graduated residency in Obstetrics and Gynecology from the University of Milan.
During his training attended at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center - Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine Department, at the Department of Gynaecology and Gynaecological Oncology of Kliniken-Essen-Mitte and at the Universidad Autonoma of Madrid.
His area of interest are: Gynecological Oncology, Gynecologic Malignancies Treatment (cervical, endometrial, ovarian and vulvar cancer and pre-invasive disease), Minimally invasive surgery in ob/gyn (Laparoscopy, Hysteroscopy), Cytoreductive surgery, Surgical techniques in gynecology, Sentinel node procedures, Laser surgery, Oncofertility, Fertility preservation in gynecologic cancers, HPV and colposcopy.
He is a European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) certified European Gynaecological Oncologist.
He was awarded the National Scientific Qualification for Associate and Full Professorship in Gynecology and Obstetric - Ministry of Education, University and Research (Italy)
He has been the 2021-2023 Italian National Representative (NATREP) at ENYGO (European Network of Young Gynaecologic Oncologists).
He is an Expert Evaluator EX2021D431400 at the European Commission Funding & Tenders and Member of the panel of Expert in Medical Devices at the European Commission (EU), since 2021.
He is an European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) member, an AAGL member and a participant in the AAGL’s oncology special interest group, member of Mario Negri Gynecologic Oncology Group (MaNGO), and past member of the Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) group and board member of the Italian Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SIOG).
He is Principal Investigator and investigator in several national and international research studies and protocols.
He has authored and co-authored more than 150 articles in peer-reviewed journals as well as various book chapters. He is a member of several editorial boards as well as a reviewer for indexed journals.
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (12)
Uploads
Papers by Fabio Martinelli
Methods: A anonymous survey consisting of 33 questions (https://sites.google.com/view/gyncacovidfmartinelli) regarding interaction between gynecologic cancers and COVID-19 was distributed online via social media from April 9 to April 30, 2020. Basic descriptive statistics were applied. Analytics of survey-diffusion and generated-interest (visualizations, engagement rates, response rate) were analyzed.
Results: The survey received 20 836 visualizations, generating an average engagement rates by reach of 4.7%. The response rate was 30%. A total of 86% of respondents completed the survey, for a total of 187 physicians surveyed across 49 countries. The majority (143/187; 76%) were gynecologic oncologists, and most were ≤50 years old (146/187; 78%). A total of 49.7% (93/187) were facing the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, while 26.7% (50/187) and 23.5% (44/187) were in the peak and plateau phases, respectively. For 97.3% (182/187) of respondents COVID-19 affected or changed their respective clinical practice. Between 16% (27/165) (before surgery) and 25% (26/102) (before medical treatment) did not perform any tests to rule out COVID-19 infection among patients. The majority of respondents did not alter indications of treatment if patients were COVID-19-negative, while treatments were generally postponed in COVID-19-positive patients. Treatments were considered priority for: early stage high-risk uterine cancers (85/187; 45%), newly diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer (76/187; 41%), and locally advanced cervical cancer (76/187; 41%). Treatment of early stage low-grade endometrioid endometrial cancer was deferred according to 49% (91/187) of respondents, with hormonal treatment as the option of therapy (31%; 56/178). A total of 77% (136/177) of respondents reported no changes in (surgical) treatment for early stage cervical cancer in COVID-19-negative patients, while treatment was postponed by 54% (96/177) of respondent, if the patient tested COVID-19-positive. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancers was considered by over one-third of respondents as well as hypofractionation of radiation treatment for locally advanced cervical cancers.
Conclusion: COVID-19 affected the treatment of gynecologic cancers patients, both in terms of prioritization and identification of strategies to reduce hospital access and length of stay. Social media is a reliable tool to perform fast-tracking, worldwide surveys.
To analyze detection-rate(DR) and diagnostic-accuracy (A) of sentinel-nodes(SLNs) mapping following hysteroscopic-injection of tracer. To compare DR and A between tracers: ICG and Tc99m.
METHODS:
Evaluation of endometrial-cancer patients who underwent SLNs mapping after hysteroscopic-peritumoral-injection of tracer±lymphadenectomy. Analysis of DR (overall-bilateral-aortic) and A in the entire cohort and comparison between tracers.
RESULTS:
202 procedures were performed from January/2005 to February/2017. Mean age:60years (28-82); mean BMI: 26.8 kg/m2 (15-47). In 133 cases (65.8%) hysterectomy and mapping procedure were performed laparoscopically. The overall-DR of the technique was 93.2% (179/192) (10 cases were excluded: 9 for technical-equipment failure; 1 for vagal reaction). Bilateral pelvic mapping was found in 59.7% of cases (107/179) and was more frequent in the ICG group (72.8% vs 53.3%; p: 0.012). In 50.8% of cases (91/179) SLNs were mapped both in pelvic and aortic nodes, and in 5 cases (2.8%) only in the aortic area. The mean number of detected SLNs was 3.7 (1-8). 22 patients (12.3%) had nodal involvement: 10-(45.5%)-macrometastases; 5-(22.7%)-micrometastases; 7-(31.8%)-ITCs. In 6 cases (27.3%) only aortic nodes were positive; in 5 cases (22.7%) both pelvic and aortic nodes and in 11 cases (50%) only pelvic nodes were involved. Three false-negative results were found, all in the Tc99m group. All had isolated aortic metastases with negative pelvic nodes. Overall-sensitivity was 86.4% (95%CI: 68.4-100) and overall-negative-predictive-value (NPV) was 96.4% (95%CI 86.7-100). No differences in terms of overall-DR, overall-sensitivity and overall-NPV were found between the two tracers.
CONCLUSIONS:
Hysteroscopic-injection of tracer for SLNs mapping in endometrial cancer is as accurate as cervical injection with a higher DR in the aortic area. ICG improves bilateral-DR. Further investigation is warranted on this topic.
To report the detection rate (DR) of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in endometrial cancer (EC) patients after hysteroscopic injection of indocyanine green (ICG) and laparoscopic near-infrared (L-NIR) fluorescence mapping.
DESIGN:
Prospectively collected data (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
SETTING:
Gynecologic oncology referral center.
PATIENTS:
Consecutive patients with apparent early-stage endometrioid EC scheduled for surgical treatment: total laparoscopic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, SLN mapping.
INTERVENTIONS:
The mapping technique consisted in an intraoperative hysteroscopic peritumoral injection of 5 mg ICG followed by L-NIR fluorescence mapping. Evaluations of the SLN DR and sites of mapping were performed.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:
A total of 57 procedures was performed. Patient mean age was 60 years (range, 28-80) and mean body mass index was 28.2 kg/m2 (range, 19-43). At least 1 SLN was detected in 89.5% of the whole population (51/57). After the first 16 cases, L-NIR camera technical improvement led to a 95% DR (39/41). The mean number of harvested SLNs was 4.1 (range. 1-8), and in 47% of cases SLNs mapped to aortic nodes (24/51). Bilateral pelvic mapping was found in 74.5% of cases (38/51). Three patients had SLN metastases: 1 in the pelvic area only, 1 both in the pelvic and aortic area, and 1 presented with 2 metastatic aortic SLNs with negative pelvic SLNs. Overall, 2 of 3 node-positive patients (67%) had aortic SLN involvement. No adverse events were reported.
CONCLUSIONS:
Laparoscopic SLN mapping after the hysteroscopic injection of ICG has comparable DRs with both radioactive tracer series and ICG series with cervical injection, overcoming the need for radioactive substances. Hysteroscopic injection leads to a higher mapping in the aortic area compared with cervical injection. Further investigation is warranted on this topic
To evaluate concordance (C) between pre-operative hysteroscopic-directed sampling and final pathology in uterine cancers.
METHODS:
A retrospective cross-sectional evaluation of prospectively collected data of women who underwent hysterectomy for uterine malignancies and a previous hysteroscopic-guided biopsy was performed. Diagnostic concordance between pre-operative (hysteroscopic biopsy) and postoperative (uterine specimen) histology was evaluated. In endometrioid-endometrial cancers cases Kappa (k) statistics was applied to evaluate agreement for grading (G) between the preoperative and final pathology.
RESULTS:
A total 101 hysterectomies for uterine malignancies were evaluated. There were 23 non-endometrioid cancers: 7 serous (C:5/7, 71.4%); 10 carcinosarcomas (C:7/10, 70%, remaining 3 cases only epithelial component diagnosed); 3 clear cell (C:3/3, 100%); 3 sarcomas (C:3/3, 100%). In 78 cases an endometrioid endometrial cancer was found. In 63 cases there was a histological C (63/78, 80.8%) between hysteroscopic-guided biopsy and final pathology, while in 15 cases (19.2%) only hyperplasia (with/without atypia) was found preoperatively. Overall accuracy to detect endometrial cancer was 80.2%. In 50 out of 63 endometrial cancers (79.4%) grading was concordant. The overall level of agreement between preoperative and postoperative grading was "substantial" according to Kappa (k) statistics (k 0.64; 95% CI: 0.449-0.83; p < 0.001), as well as for G1 (0.679; 95% CI: 0.432-0.926; p < 0.001) and G3 (0.774; 94% CI: 0.534-1; p < 0.001), while for G2 (0.531; 95% CI: 0.286-0.777; p < 0.001) it was moderate.
CONCLUSIONS:
In our series we found an 80% C between pre-operative hysteroscopic-guided biopsy and final pathology, in uterine malignancies. Moreover, hysteroscopic biopsy accurately predicted endometrial cancer in 80% of cases and "substantially" predicted histological grading. Hysteroscopic-guided uterine sampling could be a useful tool to tailor treatment in patients with uterine malignancies
Methods: A anonymous survey consisting of 33 questions (https://sites.google.com/view/gyncacovidfmartinelli) regarding interaction between gynecologic cancers and COVID-19 was distributed online via social media from April 9 to April 30, 2020. Basic descriptive statistics were applied. Analytics of survey-diffusion and generated-interest (visualizations, engagement rates, response rate) were analyzed.
Results: The survey received 20 836 visualizations, generating an average engagement rates by reach of 4.7%. The response rate was 30%. A total of 86% of respondents completed the survey, for a total of 187 physicians surveyed across 49 countries. The majority (143/187; 76%) were gynecologic oncologists, and most were ≤50 years old (146/187; 78%). A total of 49.7% (93/187) were facing the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, while 26.7% (50/187) and 23.5% (44/187) were in the peak and plateau phases, respectively. For 97.3% (182/187) of respondents COVID-19 affected or changed their respective clinical practice. Between 16% (27/165) (before surgery) and 25% (26/102) (before medical treatment) did not perform any tests to rule out COVID-19 infection among patients. The majority of respondents did not alter indications of treatment if patients were COVID-19-negative, while treatments were generally postponed in COVID-19-positive patients. Treatments were considered priority for: early stage high-risk uterine cancers (85/187; 45%), newly diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer (76/187; 41%), and locally advanced cervical cancer (76/187; 41%). Treatment of early stage low-grade endometrioid endometrial cancer was deferred according to 49% (91/187) of respondents, with hormonal treatment as the option of therapy (31%; 56/178). A total of 77% (136/177) of respondents reported no changes in (surgical) treatment for early stage cervical cancer in COVID-19-negative patients, while treatment was postponed by 54% (96/177) of respondent, if the patient tested COVID-19-positive. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancers was considered by over one-third of respondents as well as hypofractionation of radiation treatment for locally advanced cervical cancers.
Conclusion: COVID-19 affected the treatment of gynecologic cancers patients, both in terms of prioritization and identification of strategies to reduce hospital access and length of stay. Social media is a reliable tool to perform fast-tracking, worldwide surveys.
To analyze detection-rate(DR) and diagnostic-accuracy (A) of sentinel-nodes(SLNs) mapping following hysteroscopic-injection of tracer. To compare DR and A between tracers: ICG and Tc99m.
METHODS:
Evaluation of endometrial-cancer patients who underwent SLNs mapping after hysteroscopic-peritumoral-injection of tracer±lymphadenectomy. Analysis of DR (overall-bilateral-aortic) and A in the entire cohort and comparison between tracers.
RESULTS:
202 procedures were performed from January/2005 to February/2017. Mean age:60years (28-82); mean BMI: 26.8 kg/m2 (15-47). In 133 cases (65.8%) hysterectomy and mapping procedure were performed laparoscopically. The overall-DR of the technique was 93.2% (179/192) (10 cases were excluded: 9 for technical-equipment failure; 1 for vagal reaction). Bilateral pelvic mapping was found in 59.7% of cases (107/179) and was more frequent in the ICG group (72.8% vs 53.3%; p: 0.012). In 50.8% of cases (91/179) SLNs were mapped both in pelvic and aortic nodes, and in 5 cases (2.8%) only in the aortic area. The mean number of detected SLNs was 3.7 (1-8). 22 patients (12.3%) had nodal involvement: 10-(45.5%)-macrometastases; 5-(22.7%)-micrometastases; 7-(31.8%)-ITCs. In 6 cases (27.3%) only aortic nodes were positive; in 5 cases (22.7%) both pelvic and aortic nodes and in 11 cases (50%) only pelvic nodes were involved. Three false-negative results were found, all in the Tc99m group. All had isolated aortic metastases with negative pelvic nodes. Overall-sensitivity was 86.4% (95%CI: 68.4-100) and overall-negative-predictive-value (NPV) was 96.4% (95%CI 86.7-100). No differences in terms of overall-DR, overall-sensitivity and overall-NPV were found between the two tracers.
CONCLUSIONS:
Hysteroscopic-injection of tracer for SLNs mapping in endometrial cancer is as accurate as cervical injection with a higher DR in the aortic area. ICG improves bilateral-DR. Further investigation is warranted on this topic.
To report the detection rate (DR) of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in endometrial cancer (EC) patients after hysteroscopic injection of indocyanine green (ICG) and laparoscopic near-infrared (L-NIR) fluorescence mapping.
DESIGN:
Prospectively collected data (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
SETTING:
Gynecologic oncology referral center.
PATIENTS:
Consecutive patients with apparent early-stage endometrioid EC scheduled for surgical treatment: total laparoscopic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, SLN mapping.
INTERVENTIONS:
The mapping technique consisted in an intraoperative hysteroscopic peritumoral injection of 5 mg ICG followed by L-NIR fluorescence mapping. Evaluations of the SLN DR and sites of mapping were performed.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:
A total of 57 procedures was performed. Patient mean age was 60 years (range, 28-80) and mean body mass index was 28.2 kg/m2 (range, 19-43). At least 1 SLN was detected in 89.5% of the whole population (51/57). After the first 16 cases, L-NIR camera technical improvement led to a 95% DR (39/41). The mean number of harvested SLNs was 4.1 (range. 1-8), and in 47% of cases SLNs mapped to aortic nodes (24/51). Bilateral pelvic mapping was found in 74.5% of cases (38/51). Three patients had SLN metastases: 1 in the pelvic area only, 1 both in the pelvic and aortic area, and 1 presented with 2 metastatic aortic SLNs with negative pelvic SLNs. Overall, 2 of 3 node-positive patients (67%) had aortic SLN involvement. No adverse events were reported.
CONCLUSIONS:
Laparoscopic SLN mapping after the hysteroscopic injection of ICG has comparable DRs with both radioactive tracer series and ICG series with cervical injection, overcoming the need for radioactive substances. Hysteroscopic injection leads to a higher mapping in the aortic area compared with cervical injection. Further investigation is warranted on this topic
To evaluate concordance (C) between pre-operative hysteroscopic-directed sampling and final pathology in uterine cancers.
METHODS:
A retrospective cross-sectional evaluation of prospectively collected data of women who underwent hysterectomy for uterine malignancies and a previous hysteroscopic-guided biopsy was performed. Diagnostic concordance between pre-operative (hysteroscopic biopsy) and postoperative (uterine specimen) histology was evaluated. In endometrioid-endometrial cancers cases Kappa (k) statistics was applied to evaluate agreement for grading (G) between the preoperative and final pathology.
RESULTS:
A total 101 hysterectomies for uterine malignancies were evaluated. There were 23 non-endometrioid cancers: 7 serous (C:5/7, 71.4%); 10 carcinosarcomas (C:7/10, 70%, remaining 3 cases only epithelial component diagnosed); 3 clear cell (C:3/3, 100%); 3 sarcomas (C:3/3, 100%). In 78 cases an endometrioid endometrial cancer was found. In 63 cases there was a histological C (63/78, 80.8%) between hysteroscopic-guided biopsy and final pathology, while in 15 cases (19.2%) only hyperplasia (with/without atypia) was found preoperatively. Overall accuracy to detect endometrial cancer was 80.2%. In 50 out of 63 endometrial cancers (79.4%) grading was concordant. The overall level of agreement between preoperative and postoperative grading was "substantial" according to Kappa (k) statistics (k 0.64; 95% CI: 0.449-0.83; p < 0.001), as well as for G1 (0.679; 95% CI: 0.432-0.926; p < 0.001) and G3 (0.774; 94% CI: 0.534-1; p < 0.001), while for G2 (0.531; 95% CI: 0.286-0.777; p < 0.001) it was moderate.
CONCLUSIONS:
In our series we found an 80% C between pre-operative hysteroscopic-guided biopsy and final pathology, in uterine malignancies. Moreover, hysteroscopic biopsy accurately predicted endometrial cancer in 80% of cases and "substantially" predicted histological grading. Hysteroscopic-guided uterine sampling could be a useful tool to tailor treatment in patients with uterine malignancies