Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37652529›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society2023

MILACC study: could undetected lymph node micrometastases have impacted recurrence rate in the LACC trial?

Roni Nitecki, Pedro T Ramirez, Pavel Dundr, Kristyna Nemejcova, Reitan Ribeiro, Mariano Tamura Vieira Gomes, Ronaldo Luis Schmidt, Lucio Bedoya, David Ortiz Isla, Rene Pareja and 4 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 13 institutions in 7 countries.

Roni NiteckiGynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA rnitecki@mdanderson.org.ORCID 0000-0002-6176-9441
Pedro T RamirezObstetrics and Gynecology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6370-8052
Pavel DundrPathology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.
Kristyna NemejcovaPathology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.
Reitan RibeiroSurgery, Hospital Erasto Gaertner, Curitiba, Hospital, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4323-3854
Mariano Tamura Vieira GomesGynecologic Oncology, Albert Einstein Hospital, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ronaldo Luis SchmidtGynecologic Oncology, Cancer Hospital of Barretos, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Lucio BedoyaGynecologic Oncology, Hospital Misercordia, Cordoba, Argentina.
David Ortiz IslaGynecologic Oncology, Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia, Mexico City, Mexico.
Rene ParejaGynecologic Oncology, Clinica Astorga, Medellin, and Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Bogotá, Medellin, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0003-0093-0438
Gabriel Jaime Rendón PereiraGynecologic Oncology, Instituto de Cancerologia - Clínica Las Américas - AUNA, Medellin, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-7536-0567
Aldo LopezGynecologic Surgery, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas, Lima, Peru.ORCID 0000-0003-3381-9779
David KushnerGynecologic Oncology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
David CibulaObstetrics and Gynecology, University of Prague, Prague, Czech Republic.
Charles University · CZHospital de Câncer de Barretos · BRHospital Erasto Gaertner · BRHospital Israelita Albert Einstein · BRHouston Methodist · USInstituto de Cancerología Las Américas · COInstituto Nacional de Cancerología · MXInstituto Nacional de Cancerología · COInstituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas · PEPrague University of Economics and Business · CZServicio Diabetología Hospital Córdoba · ARThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Training of Academic Gynecologic OncologistsT32CA101642 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI ANIL K SOOD, Kathleen Schmeler · 2005 to 2026
$9.2M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS T32 CA101642
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe etiology of inferior oncologic outcomes associated with minimally invasive surgery for early-stage cervical cancer remains unknown. Manipulation of lymph nodes with previously unrecognized low-volume disease might explain this finding. We re-analyzed lymph nodes by pathologic ultrastaging in node-negative patients who recurred in the LACC (Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer) trial.

methodsIncluded patients were drawn from the LACC trial database, had negative lymph nodes on routine pathologic evaluation, and recurred to the abdomen and/or pelvis. Patients without recurrence or without available lymph node tissue were excluded. Paraffin tissue blocks and slides from all lymph nodes removed by lymphadenectomy were re-analyzed per standard ultrastaging protocol aimed at the detection of micrometastases (>0.2 mm and ≤2 mm) and isolated tumor cells (clusters up to 0.2 mm or <200 cells).

resultsThe study included 20 patients with median age of 42 (range 30-68) years. Most patients were randomized to minimally invasive surgery (90%), had squamous cell carcinoma (65%), FIGO 2009 stage 1B1 (95%), grade 2 (60%) disease, had no adjuvant treatment (75%), and had a single site of recurrence (55%), most commonly at the vaginal cuff (45%). Only one patient had pelvic sidewall recurrence in the absence of other disease sites. The median number of lymph nodes analyzed per patient was 18.5 (range 4-32) for a total of 412 lymph nodes. A total of 621 series and 1242 slides were reviewed centrally by the ultrastaging protocol. No metastatic disease of any size was found in any lymph node.

conclusionsThere were no lymph node low-volume metastases among patients with initially negative lymph nodes who recurred in the LACC trial. Therefore, it is unlikely that manipulation of lymph nodes containing clinically undetected metastases is the underlying cause of the higher local recurrence risk in the minimally invasive arm of the LACC trial.

Indexed as

Uterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesMiddle AgedNeoplasm MicrometastasisNeoplasm Staginglymphatic metastasislymph nodesneoplasm micrometastasispathologyuterine cervical neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID37652529
PMCPMC11781375
OpenAlexW4386324811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.