PURPOSE: The primary objective was to establish noninferiority of laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for recurrence after surgical staging of uterine cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with clinical stages I to IIA disease were randomly allocated (two to one) to laparoscopy (n = 1,696) versus laparotomy (n = 920) for hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, pelvic cytology, and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. The primary study end point was noninferiority of recurrence-free interval defined as no more than a 40% increase in the risk of recurrence with laparoscopy compared with laparotomy. RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 59 months for 2,181 patients still alive, there were 309 recurrences (210 laparoscopy; 99 laparotomy) and 350 deaths (229 laparoscopy; 121 laparotomy). The estimated hazard ratio for laparoscopy relative to laparotomy was 1.14 (90% lower bound, 0.92; 95% upper bound, 1.46), falling short of the protocol-specified definition of noninferiority. However, the actual recurrence rates were substantially lower than anticipated, resulting in an estimated 3-year recurrence rate of 11.4% with laparoscopy and 10.2% with laparotomy, or a difference of 1.14% (90% lower bound, -1.28; 95% upper bound, 4.0). The estimated 5-year overall survival was almost identical in both arms at 89.8%. CONCLUSION: This study previously reported that laparoscopic surgical management of uterine cancer is superior for short-term safety and length-of-stay end points. The potential for increased risk of cancer recurrence with laparoscopy versus laparotomy was quantified and found to be small, providing accurate information for decision making for women with uterine cancer.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The primary objective was to establish noninferiority of laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for recurrence after surgical staging of uterine cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with clinical stages I to IIA disease were randomly allocated (two to one) to laparoscopy (n = 1,696) versus laparotomy (n = 920) for hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, pelvic cytology, and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. The primary study end point was noninferiority of recurrence-free interval defined as no more than a 40% increase in the risk of recurrence with laparoscopy compared with laparotomy. RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 59 months for 2,181 patients still alive, there were 309 recurrences (210 laparoscopy; 99 laparotomy) and 350 deaths (229 laparoscopy; 121 laparotomy). The estimated hazard ratio for laparoscopy relative to laparotomy was 1.14 (90% lower bound, 0.92; 95% upper bound, 1.46), falling short of the protocol-specified definition of noninferiority. However, the actual recurrence rates were substantially lower than anticipated, resulting in an estimated 3-year recurrence rate of 11.4% with laparoscopy and 10.2% with laparotomy, or a difference of 1.14% (90% lower bound, -1.28; 95% upper bound, 4.0). The estimated 5-year overall survival was almost identical in both arms at 89.8%. CONCLUSION: This study previously reported that laparoscopic surgical management of uterine cancer is superior for short-term safety and length-of-stay end points. The potential for increased risk of cancer recurrence with laparoscopy versus laparotomy was quantified and found to be small, providing accurate information for decision making for women with uterine cancer.
Authors: Marcus E Randall; Virginia L Filiaci; Hyman Muss; Nick M Spirtos; Robert S Mannel; Jeffrey Fowler; J Tate Thigpen; Jo Ann Benda Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-12-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Monika Janda; Val Gebski; Alison Brand; Russel Hogg; Thomas W Jobling; Russel Land; Tom Manolitsas; Anthony McCartney; Marcelo Nascimento; Deborah Neesham; James L Nicklin; Martin K Oehler; Geoff Otton; Lewis Perrin; Stuart Salfinger; Ian Hammond; Yee Leung; Tom Walsh; Peter Sykes; Hextan Ngan; Andrea Garrett; Michael Laney; Tong Yow Ng; Karfai Tam; Karen Chan; C David H Wrede; Selvan Pather; Bryony Simcock; Rhonda Farrell; Andreas Obermair Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2010-07-16 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Henry M Keys; James A Roberts; Virginia L Brunetto; Richard J Zaino; Nick M Spirtos; Jeffrey D Bloss; Andrew Pearlman; Mitchell A Maiman; Jeffrey G Bell Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Christen L Walters Haygood; Janelle M Fauci; Mary Katherine Huddleston-Colburn; Warner K Huh; J Michael Straughn Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2014-03-04
Authors: Jvan Casarin; Francesco Multinu; Nadeem Abu-Rustum; David Cibula; William A Cliby; Fabio Ghezzi; Mario Leitao; Ikuo Konishi; Joo-Hyun Nam; Denis Querleu; Pamela T Soliman; Kathleen J Yost; Amy L Weaver; Andrea Mariani; Gretchen E Glaser Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Jeanne Carter; Helen Huang; Dana M Chase; Joan L Walker; David Cella; Lari Wenzel Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 3.437