Long-term follow-up of the conventional versus no-touch isolation technique for resection of primary colon cancer (JCOG1006): randomized clinical trial.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
BJS Open Pub Date : 2024-10-29 DOI:10.1093/bjsopen/zrae133
Koji Komori, Yasumasa Takii, Junki Mizusawa, Yukihide Kanemitsu, Manabu Shiozawa, Masayuki Ohue, Satoshi Ikeda, Takaya Kobatake, Tetsuya Hamaguchi, Hiroshi Katayama, Haruhiko Fukuda
{"title":"Long-term follow-up of the conventional versus no-touch isolation technique for resection of primary colon cancer (JCOG1006): randomized clinical trial.","authors":"Koji Komori, Yasumasa Takii, Junki Mizusawa, Yukihide Kanemitsu, Manabu Shiozawa, Masayuki Ohue, Satoshi Ikeda, Takaya Kobatake, Tetsuya Hamaguchi, Hiroshi Katayama, Haruhiko Fukuda","doi":"10.1093/bjsopen/zrae133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) 1006 was a phase III trial of patients with clinical T3/T4 colon cancer comparing the no-touch isolation technique ('No Touch') with the conventional technique ('Conventional'). The planned primary analysis at 3 years failed to confirm the superiority of the No Touch over the 'Conventional'. The present study aimed to compare the 'No Touch' and 'Conventional' using long-term (6-year) follow-up data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients aged 20-80 years who had a clinical classification of T3-4, N0-2, and M0 with histologically proven colon cancer were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to undergo open surgery using 'Conventional' or 'No Touch' techniques. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 853 patients from 30 institutions were assigned to the 'Conventional' (427) or 'No Touch' (426) groups between June 2011 and November 2015. The 6-year disease-free survival was 70.3% and 69.4% for 'Conventional' and 'No Touch' arms respectively (HR 1.030; 95% c.i. 0.813 to 1.304; one-sided P = 0.60). The 6-year overall survival was 89.4% and 86.6% respectively (HR 1.276; 95% c.i. 0.902 to 1.807). The 6-year relapse-free survival was 78.9% and 75.0% respectively (HR 1.209; 95% c.i. 0.920 to 1.589). The 6-year liver relapse-free survival was 85.1% and 80.2% respectively (HR 1.311; 95% c.i. 0.961 to 1.787).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Long-term follow-up data did not support the superiority of 'No Touch' over 'Conventional' technique in patients with stages II and III colon cancer. These study findings indicate that the conventional technique is still standard surgery for managing colon cancers.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>UMIN000004957.</p>","PeriodicalId":9028,"journal":{"name":"BJS Open","volume":"8 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11602131/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJS Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrae133","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) 1006 was a phase III trial of patients with clinical T3/T4 colon cancer comparing the no-touch isolation technique ('No Touch') with the conventional technique ('Conventional'). The planned primary analysis at 3 years failed to confirm the superiority of the No Touch over the 'Conventional'. The present study aimed to compare the 'No Touch' and 'Conventional' using long-term (6-year) follow-up data.

Methods: Patients aged 20-80 years who had a clinical classification of T3-4, N0-2, and M0 with histologically proven colon cancer were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to undergo open surgery using 'Conventional' or 'No Touch' techniques. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival.

Results: In total, 853 patients from 30 institutions were assigned to the 'Conventional' (427) or 'No Touch' (426) groups between June 2011 and November 2015. The 6-year disease-free survival was 70.3% and 69.4% for 'Conventional' and 'No Touch' arms respectively (HR 1.030; 95% c.i. 0.813 to 1.304; one-sided P = 0.60). The 6-year overall survival was 89.4% and 86.6% respectively (HR 1.276; 95% c.i. 0.902 to 1.807). The 6-year relapse-free survival was 78.9% and 75.0% respectively (HR 1.209; 95% c.i. 0.920 to 1.589). The 6-year liver relapse-free survival was 85.1% and 80.2% respectively (HR 1.311; 95% c.i. 0.961 to 1.787).

Conclusion: Long-term follow-up data did not support the superiority of 'No Touch' over 'Conventional' technique in patients with stages II and III colon cancer. These study findings indicate that the conventional technique is still standard surgery for managing colon cancers.

Trial registration number: UMIN000004957.

原发性结肠癌切除术中传统与非接触性分离技术的长期随访(JCOG1006):随机临床试验。
背景:日本临床肿瘤学小组(JCOG)1006 是一项针对临床 T3/T4 结肠癌患者的 III 期试验,该试验比较了无触摸隔离技术("No Touch")和传统技术("Conventional")。计划进行的 3 年主要分析未能证实 "无接触 "技术优于 "传统 "技术。本研究旨在利用长期(6 年)随访数据对 "无触摸 "和 "传统 "进行比较:随机分配(1:1)年龄在 20-80 岁、临床分级为 T3-4、N0-2 和 M0、组织学证实患有结肠癌的患者,使用 "传统 "或 "无触摸 "技术进行开腹手术。主要终点是无病生存期:2011年6月至2015年11月期间,共有来自30家机构的853名患者被分配到 "常规 "组(427人)或 "无触摸 "组(426人)。常规 "组和 "无触摸 "组的6年无病生存率分别为70.3%和69.4%(HR 1.030; 95% c.i. 0.813 to 1.304; 单侧P = 0.60)。6年总生存率分别为89.4%和86.6%(HR 1.276;95% c.i.0.902至1.807)。6年无复发生存率分别为78.9%和75.0%(HR 1.209;95% c.i.0.920至1.589)。6年肝脏无复发生存率分别为85.1%和80.2%(HR 1.311;95% c.i.0.961至1.787):长期随访数据并不支持 "无触摸 "技术在II期和III期结肠癌患者中优于 "传统 "技术。这些研究结果表明,传统技术仍是治疗结肠癌的标准手术方法:UMIN000004957.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BJS Open
BJS Open SURGERY-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
144
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信