-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Long-term outcomes of the australasian randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and conventional open surgical treatments for colon cancer: the Australasian Laparoscopic Colon Cancer Study trial.
- Philip F Bagshaw, Randall A Allardyce, Christopher M Frampton, Francis A Frizelle, Peter J Hewett, Paul J McMurrick, Nicholas A Rieger, J Shona Smith, Michael J Solomon, Andrew R L Stevenson, and Australasian Laparoscopic Colon Cancer Study Group.
- Department of Surgery, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand. bagshaw@clear.net.nz
- Ann. Surg.. 2012 Dec 1;256(6):915-9.
Objective: We report a multicentered randomized controlled trial across Australia and New Zealand comparing laparoscopic-assisted colon resection (LCR) with open colon resection (OCR) for colon cancer.Background: Colon cancer is a significant worldwide health issue. This trial investigated whether the short-term benefits associated with LCR for colon cancer could be achieved safely, without survival disadvantages, in our region.Methods: A total of 601 patients with potentially curable colon cancer were randomized to receive LCR or OCR. Primary endpoints were 5-year overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and freedom from recurrence rates, compared using an intention-to-treat analysis.Results: On April 5, 2010, 587 eligible patients were followed for a median of 5.2 years (range, 1 week-11.4 years) with 5-year confirmed follow-up data for survival and recurrence on 567 (96.6%). Significant differences between the 2 trial groups were as follows: LCR patients were older at randomization, and their pathology specimens showed smaller distal resection margins; OCR patients had some worse pathology parameters, but there were no differences in disease stages. There were no significant differences between the LCR and OCR groups in 5-year follow-up of overall survival (77.7% vs 76.0%, P = 0.64), recurrence-free survival (72.7% vs 71.2%, P = 0.70), or freedom from recurrence (86.2% vs 85.6%, P = 0.85).Conclusions: In spite of some differences in short-term surrogate oncological markers, LCR was not inferior to OCR in direct measures of survival and disease recurrence. These findings emphasize the importance of long-term data in formulating evidence-based practice guidelines.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.