[en] [en] STUDY OBJECTIVE: Two recent studies (the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer [LACC] trial and a cohort study based on the National Cancer Database) raise the question of whether minimally invasive surgery (conventional and robot-assisted laparoscopy) is inferior to open abdominal surgery in early-stage cervical cancer. In the laparotomy group of the LACC trial, the low rates of recurrence and death are notable. The present study wants to elucidate the current situation of patients with early-stage cervical cancer treated with robot-assisted laparoscopy in hospitals of the Belgium and Luxembourg Gynaecological Oncology Group (BGOG).
DESIGN: This is a prospective follow-up study.
SETTING: The combined data obtained from different BGOG hospitals were analyzed regarding patients similar to those included in the LACC trial in terms of cervical cancer recurrence and survival.
PATIENTS: We included patients with stage IA1, IA2, or IB1 cervical cancer with a histologic subtype of squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma.
INTERVENTIONS: All patients were treated with robot-assisted laparoscopy.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The outcomes were disease-free and overall survival at 3 and 5 years after surgery. A total of 270 patients were included, and 166 were found suitable for analysis. The median age was 45 years. Most patients had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB1 cervical cancer (84.9%) and squamous cell carcinoma as the histologic subtype (71.7%). The median follow-up time was 44 months, with a range of between 1 and 131 months. Twenty-one recurrences and 12 deaths were noted. Of the deaths, 8 were related to cervical cancer. Disease-free survival was 86% at 3 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 78.52-90.80) and 85% at 5 years (95% CI, 77.03-89.95). Overall survival was 96% at 3 years (95% CI, 90.11-98.22) and 91% at 5 years (95% CI, 82.54 95.17).
CONCLUSION: The results of this BGOG study show disease-free and overall survival rates after robot-assisted laparoscopy in early-stage cervical cancer that are at least similar to previous reported recurrence and survival data. We expect that the results of the Robot-assisted Approach to Cervical Cancer trial will elucidate the place of robot-assisted laparoscopy in early-stage cervical cancer.
Disciplines :
Surgery
Author, co-author :
de Bruyn, Anouk ; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AZ Klina, Brasschaat (Drs. de Bruyn and Peeters). Electronic address: anouk.de.bruyn@klina.be
Peeters, Frederik; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AZ Klina, Brasschaat (Drs. de Bruyn and Peeters
Smulders, Katrien; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, UZ Leuven, Leuven (Drs. Smulders and Vergote
Goffin, Frédéric ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > > Service de gynécologie-obstétrique (CHR) ; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, CHR De La Citadelle, Luik (Dr. Goffin
Traen, Koen; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, OLV Ziekenhuis, Aalst (Dr. Traen
Van Trappen, Philippe; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AZ Sint Jan, Brugge (Dr. Van Trappen), Belgium
Vergote, Ignace; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, UZ Leuven, Leuven (Drs. Smulders and Vergote
Language :
English
Title :
Observational BGOG Study of the Results of Robot-assisted Laparoscopy in 166 Patients with FIGO 2009 Stage IA1-IB1 Cervical Cancer.
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Cervical Cancer, version 1. 2018 Available at: http://oncolife.com.ua/doc/nccn/Cervical_Cancer.pdf Accessed October 25, 2017.
Cibula, D, Pötter, R, Planchamp, F, et al. The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology Guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 28 (2018), 641–655.
Wang, YZ, Deng, L, Xu, HC, Zhang, Y, Liang, ZQ., Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage cervical cancer. BMC Cancer, 15, 2015, 928.
Cao, T, Feng, Y, Huang, Q, Wan, T, Liu, J., Prognostic and safety roles in laparoscopic versus abdominal radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 25 (2015), 990–998.
Frumovitz, M, dos Reis, R, Sun, CC, et al. Comparison of total laparoscopic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 110 (2007), 96–102.
Sert, BM, Boggess, JF, Ahmad, S, et al. Robot-assisted versus open radical hysterectomy: a multi-institutional experience for early-stage cervical cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 42 (2016), 513–522.
Shah, CA, Beck, T, Liao, JB, Giannakopoulos, NV, Veljovich, D, Paley, P., Surgical and oncologic outcomes after robotic radical hysterectomy as compared to open radical hysterectomoy in the treatment of early cervical cancer. J Gynecol Oncol, 28, 2017, 82.
Fleshman, J, Sargent, DJ, Green, E, et al. Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST study group trial. Ann Surg 246 (2007), 655–664.
Bonjer, HJ, Deijen, CL, Abis, GA, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372 (2015), 1324–1332.
Walker, JL, Piedmonte, MR, Spirtos, NM, et al. Recurrence and survival after random assignment to laparoscopy versus laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group LAP2 study. J Clin Oncol 30 (2012), 695–700.
Janda, M, Gebski, V, Davies, LC, et al. Effect of total laparoscopic hysterectomy vs total abdominal hysterectomy on disease-free survival among women with Stage I endometrial cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 317 (2017), 1224–1233.
Huscher, CG, Mingoli, A, Sgarzini, G, et al. Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer: five-year results of a randomized prospective trial. Ann Surg 241 (2005), 232–237.
Ramirez, PT, Frumovitz, M, Pareja, R, et al. Minimally invasive versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 379 (2018), 1895–1904.
Melamed, A, Margul, DJ, Chen, L, et al. Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 379 (2018), 1905–1914.
Pecorelli, S, Zigliani, L, Odicino, F., Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105 (2009), 107–108.
Bentley, JR., Minimally-invasive radical hysterectomy for cancer of the cervix: the perspective of the society of gynecologic oncologists of Canada (GOC). J Obstet Gynaecol Can 41 (2019), 143–145.
Hernández, VMV., End of the minimal invasion surgery in cervical cancer?. Clin Oncol, 3, 2018, 1551.
Quinn, MA, Benedet, JL, Odicino, F, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix uteri. FIGO 26th Annual Report on the results of treatment in gynecological cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 95:Suppl. 1 (2006), S43–S103.
Kong, TW, Chang, SJ, Piao, X, et al. Patterns of recurrence and survival after abdominal versus laparoscopic/robotic radical hysterectomy in patients with early cervical cancer. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 42 (2016), 77–86.
Uppal, S, Gehrig, P, Vetter, MH, et al. Recurrence rates in cervical cancer patients treated with abdominal versus minimally invasive radical hysterectomy: a multi-institutional analysis of 700 cases. J Clin Oncol, 37, 2019 5504–5504.
Cusimano, MC, Baxter, NN, Gien, LT, et al. Impact of surgical approach on oncologic outcomes in women undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 221 (2019), 619.e1–619.e24.
Chen, X, Zhao, N, Ye, P, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and open radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer patients with tumor size ≤2 cm. Int J Gynecol Cancer 30 (2020), 564–571.
Alfonzo, E, Wallin, E, Ekdahl, L, et al. No survival difference between robotic and open radical hysterectomy for women with early-stage cervical cancer: results from a nationwide population-based cohort study. Eur J Cancer 116 (2019), 169–177.
Kohler, C, Hertel, H, Herrmann, J, et al. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with transvaginal closure of vaginal cuff – a multicenter analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 29 (2019), 845–850.
