Literature DB >> 18722970

A phase III randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic or robotic radical hysterectomy with abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early stage cervical cancer.

Andreas Obermair1, Val Gebski, Michael Frumovitz, Pamela T Soliman, Kathleen M Schmeler, Charles Levenback, Pedro T Ramirez.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: Cervical cancer is a significant health problem in countries of the developing world. Although case series suggest advantages of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) compared with total abdominal radical hysterectomy (TARH), no randomized controlled trial is currently available to establish TLRH as the new standard treatment. In this study, TLRH or total robotic radical hysterectomy (TRRH) will be performed without a vaginally assisted portion of the procedure.
DESIGN: A biphasic randomized controlled trial was designed to test feasibility of recruitment and equivalence in regard to disease-free survival (Canadian Task Force classification I).
SETTING: Tertiary referral hospital. PATIENTS: Patients with histologically confirmed invasive squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the cervix, stage IA1 (with lymphovascular space invasion), IA2, and IB1 are eligible.
INTERVENTIONS: During the first phase, 100 patients will be randomized (1:1) to receive either TLRH/TRRH or TARH, with the primary end point being the rate of enrollment. During the second phase, recruitment will be extended by another 640 patients in a 1:1 TLRH/TRRH:TARH allocation, to determine equivalence with respect to disease-free survival with 80% power and alpha=0.05.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Equivalence will be assumed if the difference in disease-free survival does not exceed 7% at 4 years. Secondary outcomes include treatment-related morbidity, costs and cost effectiveness, patterns of recurrence, quality of life, pelvic floor function, feasibility of intraoperative sentinel node sampling, and overall survival. All data from this multicenter study will be entered using online electronic case report forms, allowing real-time assessment of data completeness and patient follow-up.
CONCLUSION: This prospective trial aims to show the equivalence of a TLRH/TRRH versus TARH approach for patients with early stage cervical cancer following a 2-phase protocol. This trial was developed and designed with the input and approval of the members of the Gynecologic Oncology Committee from the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18722970     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2008.06.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol        ISSN: 1553-4650            Impact factor:   4.137


  39 in total

1.  Randomized trials in robotic surgery: a practical impossibility?

Authors:  Sarah Collins; Paul Tulikangas
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-07-14       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  New Developments in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Oncology Surgery.

Authors:  Katherine Ikard Stewart; Amanda N Fader
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.190

Review 3.  WITHDRAWN: Robotic assisted surgery for gynaecological cancer.

Authors:  Gang Shi; DongHao Lu; Zhihong Liu; Dan Liu; Xiaoyan Zhou
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-12-11

4.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical hysterectomy for stage IB2-to-IIB cervical cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Lei Li; Ming Wu; Shuiqing Ma; Xianjie Tan; Sen Zhong
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Make New Friends But Keep the Old: Minimally Invasive Surgery Training in Gynecologic Oncology Fellowship Programs.

Authors:  Kari L Ring; Pedro T Ramirez; Lesley B Conrad; William Burke; R Wendel Naumann; Mark F Munsell; Michael Frumovitz
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.437

6.  Sensitivity and negative predictive value for sentinel lymph node biopsy in women with early-stage cervical cancer.

Authors:  Gloria Salvo; Pedro T Ramirez; Charles F Levenback; Mark F Munsell; Elizabeth D Euscher; Pamela T Soliman; Michael Frumovitz
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 7.  Robotic surgery for gynaecologic cancer: an overview.

Authors:  René Verheijen; Ronald Zweemer
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 8.  Radical Trachelectomy for Early Stage Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Anthony Costales; Chad Michener; Pedro F Escobar-Rodriguez
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2018-11-19

9.  Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison of outcomes and cost.

Authors:  Darron Halliday; Susie Lau; Zvi Vaknin; Claire Deland; Mark Levental; Elizabeth McNamara; Raphael Gotlieb; Rebecca Kaufer; Jeffrey How; Eva Cohen; Walter H Gotlieb
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2010-11-20

10.  Robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery for gynecologic and urologic oncology: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2010-12-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.