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.


Journal

The Lancet. Oncology
ISSN: 1474-5488
Titre abrégé: Lancet Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100957246

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 2020
Historique:
received: 18 11 2019
revised: 31 01 2020
accepted: 03 02 2020
entrez: 6 6 2020
pubmed: 6 6 2020
medline: 21 7 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

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. 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. 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]). 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. MD Anderson Cancer Center and Medtronic.

Sections du résumé

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.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32502445
pii: S1470-2045(20)30081-4
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30081-4
pmc: PMC9762514
mid: NIHMS1850351
pii:
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT00614211']

Types de publication

Clinical Trial, Phase III Comparative Study Equivalence Trial Journal Article Multicenter Study Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

851-860

Subventions

Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA016672
Pays : United States

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : ErratumIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Références

Med Care. 1996 Mar;34(3):220-33
pubmed: 8628042
Cancer. 2000 Oct 1;89(7):1634-46
pubmed: 11013380
JAMA Surg. 2017 Mar 1;152(3):292-298
pubmed: 28097305
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Apr;42(4):513-22
pubmed: 26843445
Gynecol Oncol. 1999 May;73(2):177-83
pubmed: 10329031
J Gynecol Oncol. 2018 Jul;29(4):e75
pubmed: 29770634
BMJ. 2011 Feb 07;342:d40
pubmed: 21300711
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Mar;222(3):249.e1-249.e10
pubmed: 31586602
Health Policy. 1990 Dec;16(3):199-208
pubmed: 10109801
N Engl J Med. 2018 Nov 15;379(20):1895-1904
pubmed: 30380365
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Aug;11(8):772-80
pubmed: 20638899
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Sep;95(36):e4787
pubmed: 27603383
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Nov 10;27(32):5337-42
pubmed: 19805678
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009 Sep;117(1):99-109
pubmed: 18925434
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018 Jun;28(5):1020-1028
pubmed: 29727351
Ann Oncol. 2012 Apr;23(4):903-11
pubmed: 21841155
Ann Surg Oncol. 2019 Sep;26(9):2985-2993
pubmed: 31228131
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jan 15;21(2):366-73
pubmed: 12525531
Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Sep;154(3):547-553
pubmed: 31272738
J Support Oncol. 2005 Mar-Apr;3(2):133-4
pubmed: 15796445
N Engl J Med. 2018 Nov 15;379(20):1905-1914
pubmed: 30379613
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Apr;133(1):23-7
pubmed: 24680587
COPD. 2005 Mar;2(1):57-62
pubmed: 17136963
JAMA. 2002 Jan 16;287(3):321-8
pubmed: 11790211
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2019 May;29(4):651-668
pubmed: 30877144
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Aug;132(2):281-290
pubmed: 29995737
Lancet. 2012 May 19;379(9829):1887-92
pubmed: 22552194
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 20;23(30):7428-36
pubmed: 16234510
Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 Dec;48(12):2217-23
pubmed: 16228828
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2019 Jul;34(7):1211-1220
pubmed: 31102008
Gynecol Oncol. 2019 May;153(2):242-247
pubmed: 30850169
J Clin Oncol. 1993 Mar;11(3):570-9
pubmed: 8445433
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Dec;221(6):619.e1-619.e24
pubmed: 31288006
Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Apr;153(1):3-12
pubmed: 30642625

Auteurs

Michael Frumovitz (M)

Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. Electronic address: mfrumovitz@mdanderson.org.

Andreas Obermair (A)

Queensland Centre for Gynaecological Cancer Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

Robert L Coleman (RL)

Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.

Rene Pareja (R)

Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Bogotá, Colombia; Clínica de Oncología Astorga, Medellín, Colombia.

Aldo Lopez (A)

Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas, Lima, Peru.

Reitan Ribero (R)

Erasto Gaertner Hospital, Curitiba, Brazil.

David Isla (D)

Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico.

Gabriel Rendon (G)

Instituto de Cancerologia-Las Americas, Medellín, Colombia.

Marcus Q Bernardini (MQ)

Princess Margaret Cancer Center, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Alessandro Buda (A)

San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy.

Renato Moretti-Marquez (R)

Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, Centro de Oncologia e Hematologia, São Paulo, Brazil.

Albert Zevallos (A)

Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas, Lima, Peru.

Marcelo A Vieira (MA)

Barretos Cancer Hospital, São Paulo, Brazil.

Tao Zhu (T)

Institute of Cancer Research and Basic Medical Sciences of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Cancer Hospital of University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, China.

Russell P Land (RP)

School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

James Nicklin (J)

School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

Rebecca Asher (R)

National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Kristy P Robledo (KP)

National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Val Gebski (V)

National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Pedro T Ramirez (PT)

Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH