Pregnancy; Humans; Female; Canada; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/epidemiology; Hysterectomy; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/surgery; Urinary Incontinence; General Medicine
Résumé :
[en] BACKGROUND: Retrospective data suggest that the incidence of parametrial infiltration is low in patients with early-stage low-risk cervical cancer, which raises questions regarding the need for radical hysterectomy in these patients. However, data from large, randomized trials comparing outcomes of radical and simple hysterectomy are lacking.
METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing radical hysterectomy with simple hysterectomy including lymph-node assessment in patients with low-risk cervical cancer (lesions of ≤2 cm with limited stromal invasion). The primary outcome was cancer recurrence in the pelvic area (pelvic recurrence) at 3 years. The prespecified noninferiority margin for the between-group difference in pelvic recurrence at 3 years was 4 percentage points.
RESULTS: Among 700 patients who underwent randomization (350 in each group), the majority had tumors that were stage IB1 according to the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) criteria (91.7%), that had squamous-cell histologic features (61.7%), and that were grade 1 or 2 (59.3%). With a median follow-up time of 4.5 years, the incidence of pelvic recurrence at 3 years was 2.17% in the radical hysterectomy group and 2.52% in the simple hysterectomy group (an absolute difference of 0.35 percentage points; 90% confidence interval, -1.62 to 2.32). Results were similar in a per-protocol analysis. The incidence of urinary incontinence was lower in the simple hysterectomy group than in the radical hysterectomy group within 4 weeks after surgery (2.4% vs. 5.5%; P = 0.048) and beyond 4 weeks (4.7% vs. 11.0%; P = 0.003). The incidence of urinary retention in the simple hysterectomy group was also lower than that in the radical hysterectomy group within 4 weeks after surgery (0.6% vs. 11.0%; P<0.001) and beyond 4 weeks (0.6% vs. 9.9%; P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with low-risk cervical cancer, simple hysterectomy was not inferior to radical hysterectomy with respect to the 3-year incidence of pelvic recurrence and was associated with a lower risk of urinary incontinence or retention. (Funded by the Canadian Cancer Society and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01658930.).
Disciplines :
Chirurgie Oncologie Médecine de la reproduction (Gynécologie, andrologie, obstétrique)
Auteur, co-auteur :
Plante, Marie; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Laval University, Qc, Ca
Kwon, Janice; UBC - University of British Columbia [CA] > Obstetrics and Gynecology
Fergussen, Sarah; University Health Network, Gynecology Oncology
Samouëlian, Vanessa; Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM°, Université de Montréal, Ca
Ferron, Gwanael; Institut Claudius Regaud
Maulard, Amandine; Gustave Roussy, Université de Paris-Saclay > Department of Surgery
de Kroon, Cor; LUMC - Leiden University Medical Center [NL] > Gynecology
van Driel, Willemien; Nederlands Kanker Instituut, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Ziekenhuis > Gynecology
Tidy, John; Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation trust Williamson, Nottingham City Hospital > Gynecological Oncology
Williamson, Karin; From Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Quebec (M.P.), the University of British Columbia, Vancouver (J.S.K., L.B.), Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto (S.F.), Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal (V.S.), and the Canadian Cancer Trials Group, Queen's University, Kingston, ON (D.T., L.E.S.) - all in Canada, Institut Claudius Regaud, IUCT-Oncopole, Toulouse (G.F.), and Gustave Roussy Cancer Center, Villejuif (A.M.) - both in France, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden (C.K.), and the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam (W.V.D.) - both in the Netherlands, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield (J.T.), and Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham (K.W.) - both in the United Kingdom, LMU University Hospital, Munich (S.M.), and University of Tübingen Hospital, Tübingen (S.K.) - both in Germany, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liege, Liege, Belgium (F.G.), Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria (K.T.), Oslo University Hospital, Oslo (B.E.), Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea (J.-W.K.), and St. James' Hospital, Dublin (N.G
Mahner, Sven; University Hospital Ludwig-Maximilians-University > Obstetrics and Gynecology
Kommoss, Stefan; Eberhard Karls Universitats Tübingen > Ob/Gyn
Goffin, Frédéric ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > > Service de gynécologie-obstétrique (CHR) ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > > Service de gynécologie-obstétrique
DCS - Dutch Cancer Society CRUK - Cancer Research UK INCa - Institut National du Cancer CIHR - Canadian Institutes of Health Research Canadian Cancer Society
National Cancer Institute. Cancer stat facts: cervical cancer (https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/cervix.html).
Du Y, Xu Y. Less extensive surgery for patients with FIGO stage IA2 cervical cancer: a population-based study. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2022;51:102291.
Liu Q, Xu Y, He Y, et al. Simple hysterectomy for patients with stage IA2 cervical cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Cancer Manag Res 2021;13:7823-32.
Piedimonte S, Pond GR, Plante M, et al. Comparison of outcomes between abdominal, minimally invasive and combined vaginal-laparoscopic hysterectomy in patients with stage IAI/IA2 cervical cancer: 4C (Canadian Cervical Cancer Collaborative) study. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 166:230-5.
Wright JD, Grigsby PW, Brooks R, et al. Utility of parametrectomy for early stage cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy. Cancer 2007;110:1281-6.
Frumovitz M, Sun CC, Schmeler KM, et al. Parametrial involvement in radical hysterectomy specimens for women with early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:93-9.
Schmeler KM, Frumovitz M, Ramirez PT. Conservative management of early stage cervical cancer: is there a role for less radical surgery? Gynecol Oncol 2011; 120:321-5.
Covens A, Rosen B, Murphy J, et al. How important is removal of the parametrium at surgery for carcinoma of the cervix? Gynecol Oncol 2002;84:145-9.
Ramirez PT, Pareja R, Rendón GJ, Millan C, Frumovitz M, Schmeler KM. Management of low-risk early-stage cervical cancer: should conization, simple trachelectomy, or simple hysterectomy replace radical surgery as the new standard of care? Gynecol Oncol 2014;132:254-9.
Schaafsma M, Plante M, Mom CH, van Trommel NE. Is less more in the surgical treatment of early-stage cervical cancer? Curr Opin Oncol 2022;34:473-89.
Baiocchi G, de Brot L, Faloppa CC, et al. Is parametrectomy always necessary in early-stage cervical cancer? Gynecol Oncol 2017;146:16-9.
Tseng JH, Aloisi A, Sonoda Y, et al. Less versus more radical surgery in stage IB1 cervical cancer: a population-based study of long-term survival. Gynecol Oncol 2018;150:44-9.
Wu J, Logue T, Kaplan SJ, et al. Less radical surgery for early-stage cervical cancer: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021;224(4):348-358.e5.
Sia TY, Chen L, Melamed A, et al. Trends in use and effect on survival of simple hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2019;134:1132-43.
Nguyen JMV, Covens A. Simple hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: caution, but don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater! Obstet Gynecol 2019;134: 1129-31.
Schmeler KM, Pareja R, Lopez Blanco A, et al. ConCerv: a prospective trial of conservative surgery for low-risk early-stage cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2021;31:1317-25.
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN guidelines: cervical cancer. version 1.2023 (https://www.nccn.org/guidelines/guidelines-detail?category= 1&id=1426).
Carneiro VCG, Batista TP, Andrade MR, et al. Proof-of-concept randomized phase II non-inferiority trial of simple versus type B2 hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer ≤2 cm (LESSER). Int J Gynecol Cancer 2023;33:498-503.
Obermair A, Pareja R. Can simple hysterectomy replace radical hysterectomy as treatment of early-stage cervical cancer? Int J Gynecol Cancer 2023;33:647.
Studying the physical function and quality of life before and after surgery in patients with stage I cervical cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov, October 25, 2022 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01649089).
Piedimonte S, Helpman L, Pond G, et al. Surgical margin status in relation to surgical approach in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: a Canadian Cervical Cancer Collaborative (4C) study. Gynecol Oncol 2023;174:21-7.
Wang W, Shang C-L, Du Q-Q, et al. Class I versus class III radical hysterectomy in stage IB1 (tumor ≤ 2 cm) cervical cancer: a matched cohort study. J Cancer 2017;8:825-31.
Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R, et al. Minimally invasive versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 2018;379:1895-904.
Di Donato V, Bogani G, Casarin J, et al. Ten-year outcomes following laparoscopic and open abdominal radical hysterectomy for “low-risk” early-stage cervical cancer: a propensity-score based analysis. Gynecol Oncol 2023;174:49-54.
Touhami O, Plante M. Minimally invasive surgery for cervical cancer in light of the LACC trial: what have we learned? Curr Oncol 2022;29:1093-106.
Chacon E, Manzour N, Zanagnolo V, et al. SUCCOR cone study: conization before radical hysterectomy. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2022;32:117-24.
Han L, Chen Y, Zheng A, Chen H. Effect of preoperative cervical conization before hysterectomy on survival and recurrence of patients with cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol 2023;174:167-74.
Aubrey C, Pond GR, Helpman L, et al. Oncologic outcomes of surgically treated cervical cancer with no residual disease on hysterectomy specimen: a 4C (Canadian Cervical Cancer Collaborative) working group study. Curr Oncol 2023;30:1977-85.
Hoegl J, Viveros-Carreño D, Palacios T, et al. Peritoneal carcinomatosis after minimally invasive surgery versus open radical hysterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2022;32:1497-504.
