Explore the vast range of titles available.

Sentinel-lymph-node (SLN) surgery was designed to minimise the side-effects of lymph-node surgery but still offer outcomes equivalent to axillary-lymph-node dissection (ALND). The aims of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) trial B-32 were to establish whether SLN resection in patients with breast cancer achieves the same survival and regional control as ALND, but with fewer side-effects. NSABP B-32 was a randomised controlled phase 3 trial done at 80 centres in Canada and the USA between May 1, 1999, and Feb 29, 2004. Women with invasive breast cancer were randomly assigned to either SLN resection plus ALND (group 1) or to SLN resection alone with ALND only if the SLNs were positive (group 2). Random assignment was done at the NSABP Biostatistical Center (Pittsburgh, PA, USA) with a biased coin minimisation approach in an allocation ratio of 1:1. Stratification variables were age at entry (≤49 years, ≥50 years), clinical tumour size (≤2·0 cm, 2·1–4·0 cm, ≥4·1 cm), and surgical plan (lumpectomy, mastectomy). SLN resection was done with a blue dye and radioactive tracer. Outcome analyses were done in patients who were assessed as having pathologically negative sentinel nodes and for whom follow-up data were available. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. All deaths, irrespective of cause, were included. The mean time on study for the SLN-negative patients with follow-up information was 95·6 months (range 70·1–126·7). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00003830. 5611 women were randomly assigned to the treatment groups, 3989 had pathologically negative SLN. 309 deaths were reported in the 3986 SLN-negative patients with follow-up information: 140 of 1975 patients in group 1 and 169 of 2011 in group 2. Log-rank comparison of overall survival in groups 1 and 2 yielded an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1·20 (95% CI 0·96–1·50; p=0·12). 8-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for overall survival were 91·8% (95% CI 90·4–93·3) in group 1 and 90·3% (88·8–91·8) in group 2. Treatment comparisons for disease-free survival yielded an unadjusted HR of 1·05 (95% CI 0·90–1·22; p=0·54). 8-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for disease-free survival were 82·4% (80·5–84·4) in group 1 and 81·5% (79·6–83·4) in group 2. There were eight regional-node recurrences as first events in group 1 and 14 in group 2 (p=0·22). Patients are continuing follow-up for longer-term assessment of survival and regional control. The most common adverse events were allergic reactions, mostly related to the administration of the blue dye. Overall survival, disease-free survival, and regional control were statistically equivalent between groups. When the SLN is negative, SLN surgery alone with no further ALND is an appropriate, safe, and effective therapy for breast cancer patients with clinically negative lymph nodes. US Public Health Service, National Cancer Institute, and Department of Health and Human Services.

In patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer, extended lymphadenectomy did not improve disease-free or overall survival as compared with the standard procedure and was associated with higher morbidity and mortality.

We previously reported the 5-year results of the phase 3 IBCSG 23-01 trial comparing disease-free survival in patients with breast cancer with one or more micrometastatic (≤2 mm) sentinel nodes randomly assigned to either axillary dissection or no axillary dissection. The results showed no difference in disease-free survival between the groups and showed non-inferiority of no axillary dissection relative to axillary dissection. The current analysis presents the results of the study after a median follow-up of 9·7 years (IQR 7·8–12·7). In this multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, participants were recruited from 27 hospitals and cancer centres in nine countries. Eligible women could be of any age with clinical, mammographic, ultrasonographic, or pathological diagnosis of breast cancer with largest lesion diameter of 5 cm or smaller, and one or more metastatic sentinel nodes, all of which were 2 mm or smaller and with no extracapsular extension. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) before surgery (mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery) to no axillary dissection or axillary dissection using permuted blocks generated by a web-based congruence algorithm, with stratification by centre and menopausal status. The protocol-specified primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (as randomly assigned). Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received their allocated treatment (as treated). We did a one-sided test for non-inferiority of no axillary dissection by comparing the observed hazard ratios (HRs) for disease-free survival with a margin of 1·25. This 10-year follow-up analysis was not prespecified in the trial's protocol and thus was not adjusted for multiple, sequential testing. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00072293. Between April 1, 2001, and Feb 8, 2010, 6681 patients were screened and 934 randomly assigned to no axillary dissection (n=469) or axillary dissection (n=465). Three patients were ineligible and were excluded from the trial after randomisation. Disease-free survival at 10 years was 76·8% (95% CI 72·5–81·0) in the no axillary dissection group, compared with 74·9% (70·5–79·3) in the axillary dissection group (HR 0·85, 95% CI 0·65–1·11; log-rank p=0·24; p=0·0024 for non-inferiority). Long-term surgical complications included lymphoedema of any grade in 16 (4%) of 453 patients in the no axillary dissection group and 60 (13%) of 447 in the axillary dissection group, sensory neuropathy of any grade in 57 (13%) in the no axillary dissection group versus 85 (19%) in the axillary dissection group, and motor neuropathy of any grade (14 [3%] in the no axillary dissection group vs 40 [9%] in the axillary dissection group). One serious adverse event (postoperative infection and inflamed axilla requiring hospital admission) was attributed to axillary dissection; the event resolved without sequelae. The findings of the IBCSG 23-01 trial after a median follow-up of 9·7 years (IQR 7·8–12·7) corroborate those obtained at 5 years and are consistent with those of the 10-year follow-up analysis of the Z0011 trial. Together, these findings support the current practice of not doing an axillary dissection when the tumour burden in the sentinel nodes is minimal or moderate in patients with early breast cancer. International Breast Cancer Study Group.

The role of locoregional treatment in women with metastatic breast cancer at first presentation is unclear. Preclinical evidence suggests that such treatment might help the growth of metastatic disease, whereas many retrospective analyses in clinical cohorts have suggested a favourable effect of locoregional treatment in these patients. We aimed to compare the effect of locoregional treatment with no treatment on outcome in women with metastatic breast cancer at initial presentation. In this open-label, randomised controlled trial, we recruited previously untreated patients (≤65 years of age with an estimated remaining life expectancy of at least 1 year) presenting with de-novo metastatic breast cancer from Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive locoregional treatment directed at their primary breast tumour and axillary lymph nodes, or no locoregional treatment, by a computer-generated block randomisation sequence (block size of four). Randomisation was stratified by site of distant metastases, number of metastatic lesions, and hormone receptor status. Patients with resectable primary tumour in the breast that could be treated with endocrine therapy were randomly assigned upfront, whereas those with an unresectable primary tumour were planned for chemotherapy before randomisation. Of the patients who had chemotherapy before randomisation, we randomly assigned patients who had an objective tumour response after six to eight cycles of chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00193778. Between Feb 7, 2005, and Jan 18, 2013, of the 716 women presenting with de-novo metastatic breast cancer, we randomly assigned 350 patients: 173 to locoregional treatment and 177 to no locoregional treatment. At data cut-off of Nov 1, 2013, median follow-up was 23 months (IQR 12·2–38·7) with 235 deaths (locoregional treatment n=118, no locoregional treatment n=117). Median overall survival was 19·2 months (95% CI 15·98–22·46) in the locoregional treatment group and 20·5 months (16·96–23·98) in the no-locoregional treatment group (HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·81–1·34; p=0·79), and the corresponding 2-year overall survival was 41·9% (95% CI 33·9–49·7) in the locoregional treatment group and 43·0% (35·2–50·8) in the no locoregional treatment group. The only adverse event noted was wound infection related to surgery in one patient in the locoregional treatment group. There is no evidence to suggest that locoregional treatment of the primary tumour affects overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer at initial presentation who have responded to front-line chemotherapy, and this procedure should not be part of routine practice. Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India.

Background For patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma or cancer of the gastroesophageal junction, radical esophagectomy with 2-field lymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of the multimodality treatment with curative intent. Both conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) were shown to be superior compared to open transthoracic esophagectomy considering postoperative complications. However, no randomized comparison exists between MIE and RAMIE in the Western World for patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. Methods This is an investigator-initiated and investigator-driven multicenter randomized controlled parallel-group superiority trial. All adult patients (age ≥ 18 and ≤ 90 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0–3, M0) esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and with European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 will be assessed for eligibility and included after obtaining informed consent. Patients ( n  = 218) with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction are randomized to either RAMIE ( n  = 109) or MIE ( n  = 109). The primary outcome of this study is the total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes specified per lymph node station. Conclusion This is the first randomized controlled trial designed to compare RAMIE to MIE as surgical treatment for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction in the Western World. The hypothesis of the proposed study is that RAMIE will result in a higher abdominal and mediastinal lymph node yield specified per station compared to conventional MIE. Short-term results and the primary endpoint (total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes per lymph node station) will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient within this trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04306458 . Registered 13th March 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04306458; Date of first enrolment 18.01.2021; Target sample size 218; Recruitment status: Recruiting; Protocol version 2; Issue date 10.03.2020; Rev. 02.02.2021; Authors ET, PCvdS, PPG.

Background The efficacy and safety outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with D2 lymph node dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer remain unclear. Therefore, we conducted a randomized, controlled phase II trial to confirm the feasibility of LADG in terms of technical safety, and short-term surgical outcomes were investigated. Methods Eligibility criteria included pre-operatively diagnosed advanced gastric cancer that could be treated by distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection; MP, SS, and SE without involvement of other organs; and N0–2 and M0. Patients aged 20–80 years were pre-operatively randomized. Results In total, 180 patients were registered and randomized to the open (89 patients) and laparoscopic arms (91 patients). Among 91 patients in the laparoscopic arm, 86 underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy according to the study protocol. Regarding the primary endpoint of the phase II trial, the proportion of patients with either anastomotic leakage or pancreatic fistula was 4.7 % (4/86). The grade 3 or higher morbidity rate, including systemic and local complications, was 5.8 %. Conversion to open surgery was required for 1 patient (1.2 %), without any intra-operative complication. The post-operative mortality rate was 0, and no patient required readmission for surgical complications within 6 months after initial discharge. Conclusions The technical safety of LADG with D2 lymph node dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer was demonstrated. A phase III trial to confirm the non-inferiority of this procedure to open gastrectomy in terms of long-term outcomes is ongoing. Registered Number: UMIN 000003420 ( www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/ ).

Background The extent of lymphadenectomy during laparoscopic right colectomy can affect the oncological outcome and the safety of surgery. The principle of complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been gradually accepted and increasingly applied by colorectal surgeons. The aim of this study is to investigate whether extended lymphadenectomy (CME) in laparoscopic colectomy could improve the oncological outcomes of patients with right-sided colon cancers, compared with D2 lymphadenectomy. Methods/design The Radical Extent of lympadenectomy: D2 dissection versus complete mesocolic excision of LAparoscopic Right Colectomy for right-sided colon cancer (RELARC) study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial in which 1072 eligible patients with right-sided colon cancers will be randomly assigned to the CME group or the D2 dissection group during laparoscopic right colectomy. Inclusion criteria are locally advanced colon cancers situated from the cecum to the right third of the transverse colon and clinically staged as T2-4aN0M0 or TanyN + M0. The primary endpoint of this trial is 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary endpoints include 3-year overall survival, postoperative complication rates, perioperative mortality rates, and rates of positive central lymph nodes (the station 3 nodes). Discussion The RELARC trial is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial that will provide evidence on the optimal extent of lymphadenectomy during laparoscopic right colectomy in terms of better oncological outcome and operation safety. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02619942 . Registered on 29 November 2015.

BackgroundRadical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy represents the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. Results from a recent randomized controlled trial demonstrate that minimally invasive surgery is inferior to laparotomy with regards to disease-free and overall survival.Primary ObjectiveTo investigate the oncologic safety of robot-assisted surgery for early-stage cervical cancer as compared with standard laparotomy.Study HypothesisRobot-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy is non-inferior to laparotomy in regards to recurrence-free survival with the advantage of fewer post-operative complications and superior patient-reported outcomes.Trial DesignProspective, multi-institutional, international, open-label randomized clinical trial. Consecutive women with early-stage cervical cancer will be assessed for eligibility and subsequently randomized 1:1 to either robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery or laparotomy. Institutional review board approval will be required from all participating institutions. The trial is coordinated from Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden.Major Inclusion/Exclusion CriteriaWomen over 18 with cervical cancer FIGO (2018) stages IB1, IB2, and IIA1 squamous, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous will be included. Women are not eligible if they have evidence of metastatic disease, serious co-morbidity, or a secondary invasive neoplasm in the past 5 years.Primary EndpointRecurrence-free survival at 5 years between women who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus laparotomy for early-stage cervical cancer.Sample SizeThe clinical non-inferiority margin in this study is defined as a 5-year recurrence-free survival not worsened by >7.5%. With an expected recurrence-free survival of 85%, the study needs to observe 127 events with a one-sided level of significance (α) of 5% and a power (1−β) of 80%. With 5 years of recruitment and 3 years of follow-up, the necessary number of events will be reached if the study can recruit a total of 768 patients.Estimated Dates for Completing Accrual and Presenting ResultsTrial launch is estimated to be May 2019 and the trial is estimated to close in May 2027 with presentation of data shortly thereafter.Trial RegistrationThe trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03719547).

Background The standard surgical treatment for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) involves anatomical lobectomy and mediastinal lymph node dissection (MLND). According to the principle of “from distal to proximal” during tumour resection, MLND should ideally be performed before lobectomy to fit the criteria of surgical oncology. However, no prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) has compared MLND-first versus lobectomy-first approaches in early-stage NSCLC. This provides the rationale for this multicentre RCT. Methods This multicentre, prospective, open-label, RCT investigates the superiority of MLND-first over lobectomy-first in terms of long-term survival in patients with clinical stage T1-2N0-1M0 (stages I–II) NSCLC (LOFTY study). We plan to enrol 620 patients from multiple institutions. Stratified block randomisation will be performed in this trial. The primary endpoint is the 5-year disease-free survival rate, and the secondary endpoints comprise the 5-year overall survival rate and short-term outcomes, such as conversion rate, perioperative complication rate, number of resected mediastinal lymph nodes, operative death rate, postoperative hospital stays, R0 rate, operative time, chest tube duration, number of circulating tumour cells before and after operation, and the total cost of hospitalisation. The primary endpoint will be assessed by a central committee of blinded expert radiologists. Patient recruitment is currently ongoing. Discussion This multicentre, prospective, open-label RCT investigates whether MLND-first is superior to lobectomy-first in terms of long-term outcomes in early-stage NSCLC patients who are suitable for lobectomies. The results of this trial will provide high-level evidence to clarify the standard surgical sequence for early-stage operable NSCLC. Trial registration Guangdong Association Study of Thoracic Oncology GASTO-10129. Registered on 26 March. 2022. Chinese Clinical Trials Registry ChiCTR2300068586. Registered on 24 February 2023. ClinicalTrial.gov NCT06577792. Registered on 29 August 2024.

A randomized trial evaluated whether resection of lymph nodes that appeared macroscopically normal during surgery for ovarian cancer would lead to improved outcomes. Progression-free and overall survival were unaffected, and resection was associated with longer operations and more complications.