Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer
- PMID: 30380365
- DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1806395
Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer
Abstract
Background: There are limited data from retrospective studies regarding whether survival outcomes after laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (minimally invasive surgery) are equivalent to those after open abdominal radical hysterectomy (open surgery) among women with early-stage cervical cancer.
Methods: In this trial involving patients with stage IA1 (lymphovascular invasion), IA2, or IB1 cervical cancer and a histologic subtype of squamous-cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma, we randomly assigned patients to undergo minimally invasive surgery or open surgery. The primary outcome was the rate of disease-free survival at 4.5 years, with noninferiority claimed if the lower boundary of the two-sided 95% confidence interval of the between-group difference (minimally invasive surgery minus open surgery) was greater than -7.2 percentage points (i.e., closer to zero).
Results: A total of 319 patients were assigned to minimally invasive surgery and 312 to open surgery. Of the patients who were assigned to and underwent minimally invasive surgery, 84.4% underwent laparoscopy and 15.6% robot-assisted surgery. Overall, the mean age of the patients was 46.0 years. Most patients (91.9%) had stage IB1 disease. The two groups were similar with respect to histologic subtypes, the rate of lymphovascular invasion, rates of parametrial and lymph-node involvement, tumor size, tumor grade, and the rate of use of adjuvant therapy. The rate of disease-free survival at 4.5 years was 86.0% with minimally invasive surgery and 96.5% with open surgery, a difference of -10.6 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -16.4 to -4.7). Minimally invasive surgery was associated with a lower rate of disease-free survival than open surgery (3-year rate, 91.2% vs. 97.1%; hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death from cervical cancer, 3.74; 95% CI, 1.63 to 8.58), a difference that remained after adjustment for age, body-mass index, stage of disease, lymphovascular invasion, and lymph-node involvement; minimally invasive surgery was also associated with a lower rate of overall survival (3-year rate, 93.8% vs. 99.0%; hazard ratio for death from any cause, 6.00; 95% CI, 1.77 to 20.30).
Conclusions: In this trial, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was associated with lower rates of disease-free survival and overall survival than open abdominal radical hysterectomy among women with early-stage cervical cancer. (Funded by the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and Medtronic; LACC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00614211 .).
Comment in
-
Surgery in Cervical Cancer.N Engl J Med. 2018 Nov 15;379(20):1955-1957. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1814034. Epub 2018 Oct 31. N Engl J Med. 2018. PMID: 30379600 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Survival of women with early-stage cervical cancer in the UK treated with minimal access and open surgery.BJOG. 2019 Jul;126(8):956-959. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.15617. Epub 2019 Mar 1. BJOG. 2019. PMID: 30658010 No abstract available.
-
[Impact of surgical approach on prognosis in early-stage cervical cancer].Strahlenther Onkol. 2019 Mar;195(3):274-276. doi: 10.1007/s00066-019-01426-9. Strahlenther Onkol. 2019. PMID: 30689029 German. No abstract available.
-
Re: Minimally Invasive Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer.Eur Urol. 2019 May;75(5):875. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.01.029. Epub 2019 Feb 2. Eur Urol. 2019. PMID: 30718007 No abstract available.
-
Minimally Invasive or Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer.N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 21;380(8):793. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1816590. N Engl J Med. 2019. PMID: 30786197 No abstract available.
-
Minimally Invasive or Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer.N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 21;380(8):793-4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1816590. N Engl J Med. 2019. PMID: 30789679 No abstract available.
-
Minimally Invasive or Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer.N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 21;380(8):794. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1816590. N Engl J Med. 2019. PMID: 30789680 No abstract available.
-
Clinical trial should be more rigorous.Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Mar;58(2):306-307. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2019.02.005. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2019. PMID: 30910163 No abstract available.
-
Safety of laparoscopy in cervical cancer.Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019 Jun;59(3):E9. doi: 10.1111/ajo.12934. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019. PMID: 31169316 No abstract available.
-
Scores and Misses With New Technology-Walking the Narrow Path of Evidence.Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 Oct 1;105(2):237-241. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.05.015. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019. PMID: 31492378 No abstract available.
-
The LACC Trial and Minimally Invasive Surgery in Cervical Cancer.J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020 Feb;27(2):462-463. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.09.767. Epub 2019 Sep 11. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020. PMID: 31520725 No abstract available.
-
Reconsider minimally invasive surgery for early cervical cancer.Ann Transl Med. 2019 Jul;7(Suppl 3):S111. doi: 10.21037/atm.2019.05.25. Ann Transl Med. 2019. PMID: 31576318 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Regarding: "The LACC Trial and Minimally Invasive Surgery in Cervical Cancer".J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020 Jan;27(1):239-240. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.10.008. Epub 2019 Oct 21. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020. PMID: 31648053 No abstract available.
-
Laparoscopic or Open Radical Hysterectomy for Early Stage Cancer Cervix: Data Inconsistency of LACC Trial.Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2019 Oct 26;20(10):2881-2881. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.10.2881. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2019. PMID: 31653172 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Effect of a Randomized, Controlled Trial on Surgery for Cervical Cancer.N Engl J Med. 2021 Apr 29;384(17):1669-1671. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2035819. N Engl J Med. 2021. PMID: 33913646 No abstract available.