Literature DB >> 32502445

Quality of life in patients with cervical cancer after open versus minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (LACC): a secondary outcome of a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

Michael Frumovitz1, Andreas Obermair2, Robert L Coleman3, Rene Pareja4, Aldo Lopez5, Reitan Ribero6, David Isla7, Gabriel Rendon8, Marcus Q Bernardini9, Alessandro Buda10, Renato Moretti-Marquez11, Albert Zevallos5, Marcelo A Vieira12, Tao Zhu13, Russell P Land14, James Nicklin14, Rebecca Asher15, Kristy P Robledo15, Val Gebski15, Pedro T Ramirez3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 LACC trial and a subsequent population-level review, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was shown to be associated with worse disease-free survival and higher recurrence rates than was open radical hysterectomy in patients with early stage cervical cancer. Here, we report the results of a secondary endpoint, quality of life, of the LACC trial.
METHODS: The LACC trial was a randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done in 33 centres worldwide. Eligible participants were women aged 18 years or older with International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IA1 with lymphovascular space invasion, IA2, or IB1 adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, who were scheduled to have a type 2 or 3 radical hysterectomy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive open or minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. Randomisation was done centrally using a computerised minimisation program, stratified by centre, disease stage according to FIGO guidelines, and age. Neither participants nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint of the LACC trial was disease-free survival at 4·5 years, and quality of life was a secondary endpoint. Eligible patients completed validated quality-of-life and symptom assessments (12-item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12], Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cervical [FACT-Cx], EuroQoL-5D [EQ-5D], and MD Anderson Symptom Inventory [MDASI]) before surgery and at 1 and 6 weeks and 3 and 6 months after surgery (FACT-Cx was also completed at additional timepoints up to 54 months after surgery). Differences in quality of life over time between treatment groups were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who had surgery and completed at least one baseline (pretreatment) and one follow-up (at any timepoint after surgery) questionnaire, using generalised estimating equations. The LACC trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00614211.
FINDINGS: Between Jan 31, 2008, and June 22, 2017, 631 patients were enrolled; 312 assigned to the open surgery group and 319 assigned to the minimally invasive surgery group. 496 (79%) of 631 patients had surgery completed at least one baseline and one follow-up quality-of-life survey and were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (244 [78%] of 312 patients in the open surgery group and 252 [79%] of 319 participants in the minimally invasive surgery group). Median follow-up was 3·0 years (IQR 1·7-4·5). At baseline, no differences in the mean FACT-Cx total score were identified between the open surgery (129·3 [SD 18·8]) and minimally invasive surgery groups (129·8 [19·8]). No differences in mean FACT-Cx total scores were identified between the groups 6 weeks after surgery (128·7 [SD 19·9] in the open surgery group vs 130·0 [19·8] in the minimally invasive surgery group) or 3 months after surgery (132·0 [21·7] vs 133·0 [22·1]).
INTERPRETATION: Since recurrence rates are higher and disease-free survival is lower for minimally invasive radical hysterectomy than for open surgery, and postoperative quality of life is similar between the treatment groups, gynaecological oncologists should recommend open radical hysterectomy for patients with early stage cervical cancer. FUNDING: MD Anderson Cancer Center and Medtronic.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32502445     DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30081-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Oncol        ISSN: 1470-2045            Impact factor:   41.316


  17 in total

Review 1.  Increasing global accessibility to high-level treatments for cervical cancers.

Authors:  C Chargari; M Arbyn; A Leary; N R Abu-Rustum; P Basu; F Bray; S Chopra; R Nout; K Tanderup; A N Viswanathan; C Zacharopoulou; J C Soria; E Deutsch; S Gouy; P Morice
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 5.304

Review 2.  Major clinical research advances in gynecologic cancer in 2020.

Authors:  Yoo Young Lee; Min Chul Choi; Jeong Yeol Park; Dong Hoon Suh; Jae Weon Kim
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2021-07       Impact factor: 4.401

3.  Results of a German wide survey towards current surgical approach in early stage cervical cancer NOGGO MONITOR 11.

Authors:  Robert Armbrust; Frank Chen; Rolf Richter; Mustafa Zela Muallem; Alexander Mustea; Bernd Holthaus; Jalid Sehouli
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 4.  Protective operative techniques in radical hysterectomy in early cervical carcinoma and their influence on disease-free and overall survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis of risk groups.

Authors:  Johanna Kampers; E Gerhardt; P Sibbertsen; T Flock; R Klapdor; H Hertel; M Jentschke; P Hillemanns
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2021-05-22       Impact factor: 2.344

Review 5.  Management of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Yasmin Medeiros Guimarães; Luani Rezende Godoy; Adhemar Longatto-Filho; Ricardo Dos Reis
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 6.639

6.  Evaluation of Implementation Effect of Cervical Cancer Comprehensive Treatment Patients With Whole-Course High-Quality Care Combined With Network Continuation Care.

Authors:  Jing Chen; Hui Bai
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-01-31

7.  The Landmark Series: Minimally Invasive Surgery for Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Derman Basaran; Mario M Leitao
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 8.  Cervical Cancer Surgery: Current State of Affairs.

Authors:  Fan Chun Yang; Wei Huang; Weihong Yang; Jie Liu; Guihai Ai; Ning Luo; Jing Guo; Peng Teng Chua; Zhongping Cheng
Journal:  Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther       Date:  2021-04-30

9.  Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy Results in Higher Recurrence Rate Versus Open Abdominal Surgery for Stage IB1 Cervical Cancer Patients With Tumor Size Less Than 2 Centimeter: A Retrospective Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Authors:  Xiaoyue Chen; Jiangtao Yu; Hongqin Zhao; Yan Hu; Haiyan Zhu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 6.244

10.  The Overall Quality of Life and Oncological Outcomes Following Radical Hysterectomy in Cervical Cancer Survivors Results from a Large Long-Term Single-Institution Study.

Authors:  Mihai Stanca; Dan Mihai Căpîlna; Cristian Trâmbițaș; Mihai Emil Căpîlna
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-09       Impact factor: 6.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.