Survival outcomes of minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy for low‐risk, early‐stage cervical cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 149 (3) ◽  
pp. 380-381
Author(s):  
Garth Summers ◽  
Brent Tierney ◽  
David Crotzer
BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. e038020
Author(s):  
Xiaopei Chao ◽  
Ming Wu ◽  
Shuiqing Ma ◽  
Xianjie Tan ◽  
Sen Zhong ◽  
...  

IntroductionRecent studies have revealed that the oncological survival outcomes of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MIRH) are inferior to those of abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in early-stage cervical cancer, but the potential reasons are unclear.Methods and analysisEach expert from 28 study centres participating in a previously reported randomised controlled trial (NCT03739944) will provide successive eligible records of at least 100 patients who accepted radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2015. Inclusion criteria consist of a definite pathological evaluation of stages IA1 (with positive lymphovascular space invasion), IA2 and IB1 according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 staging system and a histological subtype of squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma. The primary endpoint is 5-year disease-free survival between the MIRH and ARH groups. The secondary endpoints include the MIRH learning curves of participating surgeons, 5-year overall survival between the MIRH and ARH groups, survival outcomes according to surgical chronology, surgical outcomes and sites of recurrence and potential risk factors that affect survival outcomes. A subgroup analysis in patients with tumour diameter less than 2 cm will follow the similar flow diagram.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (registration no. JS-1711), and is also filed on record by all other 27 centres. The results will be disseminated through community events and peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03738969


2021 ◽  
pp. ijgc-2021-003004
Author(s):  
Jacqueline A Bohn ◽  
Miriam L Hernandez-Zepeda ◽  
Alyssa R Hersh ◽  
Elizabeth G Munro ◽  
Jenna M Kahn ◽  
...  

ObjectiveAbdominal radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer has higher rates of disease-free and overall survival compared with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. Abdominal radical hysterectomy may be technically challenging at higher body mass index levels resulting in poorer surgical outcomes. This study sought to examine the influence of body mass index on outcomes and cost effectiveness between different treatments for early-stage cervical cancer.MethodsA Markov decision-analytic model was designed using TreeAge Pro software to compare the outcomes and costs of primary chemoradiation versus surgery in women with early-stage cervical cancer. The study used a theoretical cohort of 6000 women who were treated with abdominal radical hysterectomy, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy, or primary chemoradiation therapy. We compared the results for three body mass index groups: less than 30 kg/m2, 30–39.9 kg/m2, and 40 kg/m2 or higher. Model inputs were derived from the literature. Outcomes included complications, recurrence, death, costs, and quality-adjusted life years. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of less than $100 000 per quality-adjusted life year was used as our willingness-to-pay threshold. Sensitivity analyses were performed broadly to determine the robustness of the results.ResultsComparing abdominal radical hysterectomy with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy, abdominal radical hysterectomy was associated with 526 fewer recurrences and 382 fewer deaths compared with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy; however, abdominal radical hysterectomy resulted in more complications for each body mass index category. When the body mass index was 40 kg/m2 or higher, abdominal radical hysterectomy became the dominant strategy because it led to better outcomes with lower costs than minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. Comparing abdominal radical hysterectomy with primary chemoradiation therapy, recurrence rates were similar, with more deaths associated with surgery across each body mass index category. Chemoradiation therapy became cost effective when the body mass index was 40 kg/m2 or higher.ConclusionWhen the body mass index is 40 kg/m2 or higher, abdominal radical hysterectomy is cost saving compared with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy and primary chemoradiation is cost effective compared with abdominal radical hysterectomy. Primary chemoradiation may be the optimal management strategy at higher body mass indexes.


JAMA Oncology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (7) ◽  
pp. 1019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roni Nitecki ◽  
Pedro T. Ramirez ◽  
Michael Frumovitz ◽  
Kate J. Krause ◽  
Ana I. Tergas ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 79 (02) ◽  
pp. 145-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Hillemanns ◽  
Sara Brucker ◽  
Bernd Holthaus ◽  
Rainer Kimmig ◽  
Björn Lampe ◽  
...  

AbstractIn this opinion on the randomized study comparing minimally invasive with abdominal radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer (LACC), the Uterus Commission of the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO) and the Gynecological Endoscopy Working Group (AGE) of the Germany Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) state that, based on their examination of the published data, patients with FIGO stage IA1 (with LVSI), IA2 or IB1 cervical cancer must be informed about the results of this LACC study prior to making a decision on the route for radical hysterectomy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 162 ◽  
pp. S178
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Nasioudis ◽  
Leslie Andriani ◽  
Maureen Byrne ◽  
Emily Ko ◽  
Ashley Haggerty ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document