Laparoscopic vs. Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer

Comparison of outcomes of laparotomic and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in women with early-stage cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the outcomes of laparotomic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MISRH) in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

METHODS

The clinical data of patients with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent LRH or MISRH (laparoscopic/robotic) at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Branch, from 2002 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The surgical safety (operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion rate, length of postoperative stay, and perioperative complications), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence pattern were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a 3:1 ratio was performed to balance prognostic variables.

RESULTS

Of the 760 patients (entire cohort), 614 underwent LRH and 146 underwent MISRH. After PSM, 394 and 140 patients were included in the LRH and MISRH groups, respectively. The 5-year OS rate was significantly lower in the MISRH group than in the LRH group (85.6% vs. 93.2%, p=0.043), and the 5-year DFS rate (p=0.21) did not differ significantly. After PSM, the 5-year OS rates did not differ significantly between the MISRH and LRH groups (87.1% vs. 92.1%, p=0.393). The MISRH group had a significantly shorter operation time (p<0.001), lower intraoperative blood loss (p<0.001), lower blood transfusion rate (p<0.001), and shorter postoperative stay (p<0.001) but a significantly higher rate of intraoperative bladder injury (p<0.001) than the LRH group.

CONCLUSION

After PSM, MISRH is associated with nonsignificantly lower OS but a significantly higher risk of intraoperative urological complications than LRH.

A comparison of concurrent chemoradiotherapy and radical surgery in patients with specific locally advanced cervical cancer (stage IB3, IIA2, IIICr): trial protocol for a randomized controlled study (C-CRAL trial)

BACKGROUND

At present, clinical dilemma remains to be solved in terms of therapy-choices for specific locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) patients: 1) Although concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is recommended as the first choice for them, many patients, influenced by the Chinese culture, prefer to choose radical surgery (RS) as their primary treatment. The difference between the 2 therapies in improving patient prognosis is still unknown. 2) Laparoscopy has been questioned since the noted Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial. Nevertheless, clinical research on laparoscopic surgery under the strict tumor-free principle is still underway globally, therefore whether laparoscopic surgery can be used for specific LACC is also an urgent issue to be explored.

METHODS

A multi-center, randomized controlled study is designed to investigate the effect of different treatment strategies on the prognosis and quality of life (QoL) in patients with specific locally LACC. A total of 402 patients will be enrolled over a period of 3 years. Eligible patients will be randomized (3:1) to either RS group or CCRT group. Patients assigned to RS group will be randomized (1:2) to the abdominal RS group or laparoscopic RS group. All patients will then be followed-up for 5 years. The primary end point is the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary end points include 5-year PFS, 2-year overall survival (OS), 5-year OS, adverse events caused by RS or CCRT and QoL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ChiCTR2000041315.

MiR-520d-3p suppresses the proliferation and epithelial-mesenchymal transition of cervical cancer cells by targeting ZFP36L2

MiR-520d-3p has recently been reported to have anti-tumor function in several cancers, including glioma and gastric cancer. However, the biological function and its mechanism of action remain unclear in cervical cancer (CC). In this study, we observed that miR-520d-3p expression was lowly expressed in CC specimens compared with adjacent normal specimens using reverse transcription quantitative PCR. Moreover, low miR-520d-3p expression was correlated with FIGO stage and lymph node metastasis by Chi-square test. Functionally, overexpression of miR-520d-3p suppressed the proliferation and migration and invasion of two CC cell lines (HeLa and SiHa) using CCK-8 assay and wound healing assay. After target prediction, luciferase reporter assay showed that zinc finger protein 36 ring finger protein-like 2 (ZFP36L2) was a direct target of miR-520d-3p in CC cells. The expression levels of ZFP36L2 at protein and mRNA were significantly increased in CC tissues compared with adjacent tissues. The expression of ZFP36L2 was negatively correlated with miR-520d-3p in the patients with CC. Importantly, ZFP36L2 overexpression abolished the effects of miR-520d-3p on cell proliferation, migration and EMT process in CC cells. In conclusion, our findings indicate that targeting miR-520d-3p/ZFP36L2 axis might be a promising therapeutic target for CC treatment.

Meta-analysis of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy, excluding robotic assisted versus open radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer

Recent evidence has shown an increase in recurrence and a decrease in overall survival in patients treated with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and robotic assisted radical hysterectomy (RRH) open techniques (ORH). In addition, several high quality trials were recently published regarding the laparoscopic treatment of early stage cervical cancer. We sought out to reassess the recurrence rates, overall survival, complications and outcomes associated with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) techniques against open techniques (ORH) when robotic assisted techniques were excluded. We searched PubMed, Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL, SCOPUS, ClinicalTrials.Gov and Web of Science for relevant clinical trials and observational studies. We included all studies that compared with early stage cervical cancer receiving LRH compared with ORH. We included randomized clinical trials, prospective cohort, and retrospective cohort trials. We included studies that included LRH and RRH as long as data was available to separate the two arms. We excluded studies that combined LRH and RRH without supplying data to differentiate. Of 1244 total studies, we used a manual three step screening process. Sixty studies ultimately met our criteria. We performed this review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We analyzed continuous data using mean difference (MD) and a 95% confidence interval (CI), while dichotomous data were analyzed using odds ratio (OR) and a 95% CI. Review Manager and Endnote software were utilized in the synthesis. We found that when excluding RRH, the was no significant difference regarding 5-year overall Survival (OR = 1.24 [0.94, 1.64], (P = 0.12), disease free survival (OR = 1.00 [0.80, 1.26], (P = 0.98), recurrence (OR = 1.01 [0.81, 1.25], (P = 0.95), or intraoperative complications (OR = 1.38 [0.94, 2.04], (P = 0.10). LRH was statistically better than ORH in terms of estimated blood loss (MD = - 325.55 [- 386.16, - 264.94] (P < 0.001), blood transfusion rate (OR = 0.28 [0.14, 0.55], (P = 0.002), postoperative complication rate (OR = 0.70 [0.55, 0.90], (P = 0.005), and length of hospital stay (MD = - 3.64[- 4.27, - 3.01], (P < 0.001). ORH was superior in terms of operating time (MD = 20.48 [8.62, 32.35], (P = 0.007) and number of resected lymph nodes (MD = - 2.80 [- 4.35, - 1.24], (P = 0.004). The previously seen increase recurrence and decrease in survival is not seen in LRH when robotic assisted techniques are included and all new high quality is considered. LRH is also associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay, less blood loss and lower complication rate.Prospero Prospective Registration Number: CRD42022267138.

Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of five different approaches to cervical cancer surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search for comparative studies on different radical hysterectomy types for cervical cancer in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. All included observational studies used survival analyses to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing different radical hysterectomy types. All studies were assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale with scores of at least seven points. We extracted the relevant data and conducted a network meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes among five surgical approaches.

RESULTS

Thirty studies (n = 11 353) were included. Robotic surgery had the lowest blood loss volume and hospitalization duration; open surgery had the shortest operative time. Vaginal assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with the highest number of resected lymph nodes and lowest rate of perioperative complications. Survival outcomes and tumor recurrence outcomes were similar among the approaches.

CONCLUSION

The current approaches to cervical cancer surgery have comparable efficacies.

Laparoscopic Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and open abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) have been used for cervical cancer treatment. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of LRH and ARH in the treatment of cervical cancer to provide reliable evidence to the clinical cervical cancer treatment.

METHODS

Two investigators independently searched PubMed and other databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LRH and ARH for cervical cancer treatment up to May 31, 2022. The risk of bias assessment tool recommended by Cochrane library was used for quality assessment. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs with a total of 1700 patients with cervical cancer were finally included. Meta-analyses indicated that compared with ARH, LRH reduced the intraoperative blood loss (mean difference [MD]=-58.08; 95% CI, -70.91, -45.24), the time to first passage of flatus (MD=-14.50; 95% CI, -16.55, -12.44) (all P <0.05), and increase the number of lymph nodes removed (MD=3.47; 95% CI, 0.51, 6.43; P =0.02). There were no significant differences in the duration of surgery (MD=27.62; 95% CI, -6.26, 61.49), intraoperative complications (odd ratio [OR]=1.10; 95% CI, 0.17, 7.32), postoperative complications (OR=0.78; 95% CI, 0.33, 1.86), relapse rate (OR=1.45; 95% CI, 0.56, 3.74), and survival rate (OR=0.75; 95% CI, 0.52, 1.08) between LRH group and ARH group (all P >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

LRH has more advantages over ARH in the treatment of cervical cancer. Still, the long-term effects and safety of LRH and ARH need more high-quality, large-sample RCTs to be further verified.

Comparison of Minimally Invasive Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Background

Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) was commonly used to treat patients with early-stage cervical cancer, its efficacy remained controversial.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases until March 2021 to compare the prognosis of early-stage cervical cancer patients who underwent MIS (laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical hysterectomy) or ARH. The primary outcomes included rates of 3- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42021258116.

Results

This meta-analysis included 48 studies involving 23346 patients (11220, MIS group; 12126, ARH group). The MIS group had a poorer medium-term (3-year) DFS (HR=1.08, 95% CI: 1.01-1.16, p=0.031) than the ARH group, without significant difference in medium-term OS as well as long-term (5-year) DFS and OS. Subgroup analysis of 3-year prognosis revealed that although patients in Western countries who underwent MIS had shorter DFS than those who underwent ARH (HR=1.10, p=0.024), no difference was observed in DFS among those in Asian countries. Moreover, MIS was linked to poorer 3-year DFS in patients with stage I cervical cancer (HR=1.07, p=0.020). Notably, subgroup analysis of 5-year prognosis revealed that patients with tumor size ≥2 cm undergoing MIS exhibited a shorter DFS than those who underwent ARH (HR=1.65, p=0.041).

Conclusion

Patients with early-stage cervical cancer undergoing MIS may have a poorer prognosis than those undergoing ARH. Therefore, applying MIS in early-stage cervical cancer patients should be conducted with caution.

Systematic Review Registration

The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42021258116.

Comparison of Survival Outcomes after Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy in Patients with Cervical Cancer

OBJECTIVE

A meta-analysis was performed to compare survival outcomes including disease-free survival (DFS) between laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in patients with cervical cancer.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Google scholar, and the Cochrane library for studies published between December 2004 and May 2020. Manual searches of related articles and relevant bibliographies of published studies were also performed.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Two researchers independently extracted the data. Studies with survival outcome information were included.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

A total of 36 eligible clinical trials were included in this meta-analysis. When all studies were pooled, the hazard ratio (HR) of LRH for the risk of DFS and overall survival (OS) compared with ARH was 1.24 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.41; p = .001; I² = 37.5%) and 1.27 (95% CI, 1.04-1.56; p = .020; I² = 45.5%), respectively. In a subgroup analysis, significant harmful effects of DFS in patients with LRH increased in studies using the HR presented by the article (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.21-1.64; p <.001), matched retrospective design (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.19-1.88; p = .001), large-scale studies (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.16-1.55; p <.001), and studies published after the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.25-1.71; p <.001). However, LRH did not affect DFS (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.59-1.81; p = .898) or OS (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.31-1.05; p = .073) of patients with cervical cancer with cervical masses <2 cm.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that LRH was associated with higher recurrence rates than ARH. However, LRH showed similar recurrence and OS among patients with cervical masses <2 cm (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination 42020191713).

CircAMOTL1 Promotes Tumorigenesis Through miR-526b/SIK2 Axis in Cervical Cancer

Background

Cervical cancer is one of the most common malignancies in women, leading to major health problems for its high morbidity and mortality. Numerous studies have demonstrated that circular RNAs (circRNAs) could be participated in the progression of multifarious diseases, especially plentiful carcinomas. CircAMOTL1 (angiomotin-like1, ID: hsa_circ_0004214), which is located on human chromosome 11:9 4532555-94533477, is involved in the occurrence of breast cancer, etc. However, the intrinsic and concrete molecular mechanism of circAMOTL1 in cervical carcinomas remained thoroughly unclear, which was also the bottleneck of circRNAs studies in cancer.

Methods

The relative expression levels of circAMOTL1 and miR-526b in cervical carcinoma patients’ specimens and cervical carcinoma cell lines were detected by RT-qPCR. Through experiments including loss-function and overexpression, the biological effects of circAMOTL1 and miR-526b on the proliferation, migration, apoptosis, and tumorigenicity were explored in cervical carcinomas. Dual luciferase reporter gene analysis, western blot, and other methods were adopted to explore the circAMOTL1 potential mechanism in cervical carcinomas.

Results

In our experiments, our researches displayed that circAMOTL1 was significantly higher expression in cervical carcinomas specimens and cell lines. Further experiments illustrated that the knockdown of circAMOTL1 could restrain the malignant phenotype, AKT signaling, and epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) of in cervical carcinomas cells. Meanwhile miR-526b was downregulated in cervical carcinomas and even miR-526b could partially reverse circAMOTL1 function in malignant cervical tumor cells. CircAMOTL1 acts as a microRNA (miRNA) sponge that actively regulates the expression of salt-inducible kinase 2 (SIK2) to sponge miR-526b and subsequently increases malignant phenotypes of cervical carcinomas cells. In a word, circAMOTL1 acts a carcinogenic role and miR-526b serves as the opposite function of antioncogene in the cervical carcinoma pathogenesis.

Conclusion

CircAMOTL1-miR-526b-SIK2 axis referred to the malignant progression and development of cervical carcinomas. CircAMOTL1 expression was inversely correlated with miR-526b and positively correlated with SIK2 mRNA in cervical cancer tissues. Thus, circAMOTL1 exerted an oncogenic role in cervical cancer progression through sponging miR-526b. Taken together, our study revealed that circAMOTL1 acted as an oncogene and probably was a potential therapeutic target for the cervical cancer.