Literature DB >> 31757656

Survival outcomes after laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy versus open distal gastrectomy with nodal dissection for clinical stage IA or IB gastric cancer (JCOG0912): a multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

Hitoshi Katai1, Junki Mizusawa2, Hiroshi Katayama2, Shinji Morita3, Takanobu Yamada4, Etsuro Bando5, Seiji Ito6, Masakazu Takagi7, Akinori Takagane8, Shin Teshima9, Keisuke Koeda10, Souya Nunobe11, Takaki Yoshikawa3, Masanori Terashima5, Mitsuru Sasako12.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) is increasingly being used as an alternative to open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for gastric cancer treatment. Retrospective studies have shown equivalent survival with the two procedures, but these studies are limited by selection bias because LADG is more technically difficult than ODG. We aimed to evaluate whether LADG was non-inferior to ODG in terms of long-term survival outcomes.
METHODS: We did an open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 randomised controlled trial at 33 institutions in Japan. Patients aged 20-80 years with histologically confirmed gastric adenocarcinoma (T1N0, T1N1, or T2[MP]N0), clinical stage I, in the middle or lower third of the stomach, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, with a body-mass index of less than 30 kg/m2, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ODG or LADG. Randomisation was done by telephone, fax, or with a web-based system in the Japan Clinical Oncology Group Data Center; a minimisation method with a random component was used to adjust for institution and clinical stage (IA or IB). Only study-accredited surgeons performed ODG and LADG. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival and was analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. The non-inferiority margin (LADG vs ODG) was set at a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·54. The trial was registered with the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000003319.
FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2010, and Nov 29, 2013, 921 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ODG (n=459) or LADG (n=462). 912 (99%) participants had the assigned surgery. 5-year relapse-free survival was 94·0% (95% CI 91·4-95·9) in the ODG group and 95·1% (92·7-96·8) in the LADG group. LADG was non-inferior to ODG for relapse-free survival (HR 0·84 [90% CI 0·56-1·27]), p=0·0075). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event was bowel obstruction, occurring in 11 (2%) of 455 patients in the ODG group and five (1%) of 457 patients in the LADG group. There were no treatment-related deaths.
INTERPRETATION: This trial supports the non-inferiority of LADG compared with ODG for clinical stage I gastric cancer relapse-free survival, suggesting that LADG should be considered a standard treatment option when performed by experienced surgeons. FUNDING: Japan National Cancer Center, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan, Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31757656     DOI: 10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30332-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol


  58 in total

Review 1.  Current status of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Authors:  Yoo Min Kim; Woo Jin Hyung
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-01-04

Review 2.  [Reconstruction following gastrectomy].

Authors:  Marie-Christin Weber; Maximilian Berlet; Alexander Novotny; Helmut Friess; Daniel Reim
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 0.955

3.  Features of the complications for intracorporeal Billroth-I and Roux-en-Y reconstruction after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Authors:  Yoshiaki Shoji; Koshi Kumagai; Satoshi Ida; Manabu Ohashi; Naoki Hiki; Takeshi Sano; Souya Nunobe
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-02-18       Impact factor: 3.445

4.  Comparison of long-term outcomes after robotic versus laparoscopic radical gastrectomy: a propensity score-matching study.

Authors:  Jin-Tao Li; Jian-Xian Lin; Fu-Hai Wang; Jia-Bin Wang; Jun Lu; Qi-Yue Chen; Long-Long Cao; Mi Lin; Ru-Hong Tu; Ze-Ning Huang; Ju-Li Lin; Hua-Long Zheng; Chao-Hui Zheng; Chang-Ming Huang; Ping Li
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  The Advantages of Robotic Gastrectomy over Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastric Cancer.

Authors:  Tomoyuki Matsunaga; Wataru Miyauchi; Yusuke Kono; Yuji Shishido; Kozo Miyatani; Takehiko Hanaki; Joji Watanabe; Kyoichi Kihara; Manabu Yamamoto; Yoji Fukumoto; Naruo Tokuyasu; Shuichi Takano; Teruhisa Sakamoto; Soichiro Honjo; Hiroaki Saito; Yoshiyuki Fujiwara
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 1.641

6.  A matched cohort study of the failure pattern after laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: does the operative approach matter?

Authors:  Jun Lu; Dong Wu; Bin-Bin Xu; Zhen Xue; Hua-Long Zheng; Jian-Wei Xie; Jia-Bin Wang; Jian-Xian Lin; Ping Li; Chao-Hui Zheng; Chang-Ming Huang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Laparoscopy-assisted Distal Gastrectomy should become a Standard Surgical Treatment Option for Stage IA/IB Gastric Cancer.

Authors:  Qian Liu
Journal:  Glob Med Genet       Date:  2021-03-16

8.  Surgical treatment of gastric cancer: Current status and future directions.

Authors:  Jiahui Chen; Zhaode Bu; Jiafu Ji
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 5.087

9.  Laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: Current status and future direction.

Authors:  So Hyun Kang; Hyung-Ho Kim
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 10.  The 140 years' journey of gastric cancer surgery: From the two hands of Billroth to the multiple hands of the robot.

Authors:  Masanori Terashima
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol Surg       Date:  2021-02-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.