Survival after Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer
Top Cited Papers
- 14 November 2018
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 379 (20), 1905-1914
- https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1804923
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive surgery was adopted as an alternative to laparotomy (open surgery) for radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer before high-quality evidence regarding its effect on survival was available. We sought to determine the effect of minimally invasive surgery on all-cause mortality among women undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. METHODS We performed a cohort study involving women who underwent radical hysterectomy for stage IA2 or IB1 cervical cancer during the 2010-2013 period at Commission on Cancer-accredited hospitals in the United States. The study used inverse probability of treatment propensity-score weighting. We also conducted an interrupted time-series analysis involving women who underwent radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer during the 2000-2010 period, using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database. RESULTS In the primary analysis, 1225 of 2461 women (49.8%) underwent minimally invasive surgery. Women treated with minimally invasive surgery were more often white, privately insured, and from ZIP Codes with higher socioeconomic status, had smaller, lower-grade tumors, and were more likely to have received a diagnosis later in the study period than women who underwent open surgery. Over a median follow-up of 45 months, the 4-year mortality was 9.1% among women who underwent minimally invasive surgery and 5.3% among those who underwent open surgery (hazard ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22 to 2.22; P=0.002 by the log-rank test). Before the adoption of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (i.e., in the 2000-2006 period), the 4-year relative survival rate among women who underwent radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer remained stable (annual percentage change, 0.3%; 95% CI, -0.1 to 0.6). The adoption of minimally invasive surgery coincided with a decline in the 4-year relative survival rate of 0.8% (95% CI, 0.3 to 1.4) per year after 2006 (P=0.01 for change of trend). CONCLUSIONS In an epidemiologic study, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was associated with shorter overall survival than open surgery among women with stage IA2 or IB1 cervical carcinoma.Funding Information
- American Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Foundation
- Jean Donovan Estate and the Phebe Novakovic Fund
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K12 HD050121-12)
- The Foundation for Women’s Cancer
- National Cancer Institute (4P30 CA060553-22, P30 CA016672, R25 CA092203)
This publication has 50 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive and abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancerGynecologic Oncology, 2012
- Cervical cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-upAnnals Of Oncology, 2012
- Recurrence and Survival After Random Assignment to Laparoscopy Versus Laparotomy for Comprehensive Surgical Staging of Uterine Cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group LAP2 StudyJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2012
- Laparoscopic, robotic and open method of radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A systematic reviewJournal of Minimal Access Surgery, 2012
- Robotically Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy Compared With Open Radical HysterectomyInternational Journal of Gynecologic Cancer, 2010
- Primary therapy for early-stage cervical cancer: radical hysterectomy vs radiationAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2009
- Smoking and survival among Kentucky women diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer: 1995–2005Gynecologic Oncology, 2009
- Diagnosis and management of cervical cancerBMJ, 2007
- Randomised study of radical surgery versus radiotherapy for stage Ib-IIa cervical cancerThe Lancet, 1997
- Model-Based Direct AdjustmentJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1987