Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39570589›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2024

Laparoscopic Cytoreduction After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in High-Grade Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A LANCE Randomized Clinical Trial.

J Alejandro Rauh-Hain, Alexander Melamed, René Pareja, Taymaa May, Abdulrahman Sinno, Leah McNally, Neil S Horowitz, Pierandrea De Iaco, Chad M Michener, Luc Van Lonkhuijzen and 4 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04575935 (Laparoscopic Cytoreduction After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04575935 phase3recruitingnot on this map

Laparoscopic Cytoreduction After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

TypeinterventionalSponsorM.D. Anderson Cancer CenterRan2020 to 2028Enrolled580ConditionsAdvanced Ovarian Carcinoma, Fallopian Tube Clear Cell Adenocarcinoma, Fallopian Tube Endometrioid Tumor, Fallopian Tube Serous NeoplasmArmsChemotherapy, Laparotomy, Minimally Invasive Surgery, Quality-of-Life Assessment, Questionnaire Administration
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. [Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

J Alejandro Rauh-HainDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Alexander MelamedDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, Vincent Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston.
René ParejaDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Bogotá, Colombia.
Taymaa MayPrincess Margaret Hospital Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abdulrahman SinnoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecological Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.
Leah McNallyDuke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Neil S HorowitzDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Pierandrea De IacoDivision of Oncologic Gynecology, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Chad M MichenerObstetrics and Gynecology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Luc Van LonkhuijzenDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Maria D IniestaDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Ying YuanDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Pedro T RamirezDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Neal Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Anna FagottiDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Policlinico A Gemelli, Rome, Italy.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Despite the absence of high-quality evidence of its safety and effectiveness, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is increasingly used to treat advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Objective: To assess the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomized clinical trial (RCT) designed to compare the efficacy of MIS vs laparotomy in patients with advanced-stage EOC and a complete or partial response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Design, Setting, and Participants: This lead-in pilot phase of LANCE (Laparoscopic Cytoreduction After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy), an international, open-label, noninferiority RCT, opened to enrollment in September 2020 and enrolled the 100th eligible patient in February 2023. It was conducted at 11 academic cancer centers in North America and Europe. Participants were adults with stage IIIC or IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian, or primary peritoneal carcinoma who had normal cancer antigen 125 levels and at least a partial radiologic response after 3 to 4 cycles of NACT. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either interval cytoreductive surgery performed using MIS or laparotomy. Data analysis was based on the evaluable population. Interventions: The MIS arm underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery, vs laparotomy for the control arm. Resection of all visible tumor was attempted, and conversion from MIS to laparotomy was performed when necessary to attain complete resection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Trial feasibility was defined by 3 primary end points: patient accrual rate of at least 5.6 patients per month by the last month of the lead-in pilot phase, conversion from MIS to laparotomy in less than 25% of patients, and a difference in complete gross resection rates of fewer than 20 percentage points between study arms. Results: One hundred women (median [IQR] age, 63 [39-82] years) were included, of whom 49 were randomly assigned to MIS and 51 to laparotomy; 95 were evaluable for surgical outcomes. Most patients (34 [67%] in the laparotomy arm, and 33 [67%] in the MIS arm) had stage IIIC cancer. The monthly accrual rate reached 5.9 patients per month in the final month of the study. Six of 48 evaluable patients (12.5%; 95% CI, 4.7%-25.2%) assigned to MIS underwent conversion to laparotomy. Surgeons achieved a complete gross resection rate in 42 of 48 evaluable patients (88%) assigned to MIS and in 39 of 47 patients (83%) assigned to laparotomy (difference, 4.5 [95% CI, -9.7 to 18.8] percentage points). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this lead-in pilot study indicated the feasibility of the LANCE RCT to compare the oncological outcomes of MIS vs laparotomy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04575935.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresLaparoscopyNeoadjuvant TherapyOvarian NeoplasmsAdultAgedChemotherapy, AdjuvantFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansLaparotomyMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsRobotic Surgical Procedures

Identifiers

PMID39570589
PMCPMC11582931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.