Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT00726622
NCT00726622
Completed
Phase 3

A Phase III Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection Versus Open Resection for Rectal Cancer

Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology37 sites in 2 countries486 target enrollmentAugust 2008

Overview

Phase
Phase 3
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Colorectal Cancer
Sponsor
Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology
Enrollment
486
Locations
37
Primary Endpoint
Comparing Laparoscopic-assisted Resection to Open Rectal Resection for Rectal Cancer as Measured by the Percentage of Patients With Successful Resection Based on Pathological Evaluation.
Status
Completed
Last Updated
5 years ago

Overview

Brief Summary

This study is being done to compare two types of surgery currently used for rectal cancer. The two types of surgery are laparoscopic-assisted rectal resection and open laparotomy rectal resection. Although laparoscopic-assisted rectal resection is being used for rectal cancer in some medical centers, the effectiveness of this type of surgery compared to open surgery is unknown. The study will compare the safety and effectiveness of the surgeries, recovery from surgery in the hospital, overall recovery from surgery and cancer outcome.

Detailed Description

This is a multicenter study. Patients eligible for this trial will have completed 5FU based neoadjuvant chemotherapy/radiation therapy per the institution's standard of care or IRB approved clinical trial. Patients may be registered/randomized anytime after completion of neoadjuvant therapy, but surgery must occur within 4-12 weeks (28-84 days) after completion of neoadjuvant therapy. Patients are stratified according to the site of the primary tumor (high, middle or low rectum), registering surgeon, and planned operative procedure (low anterior resection or abdominal perineal resection). Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 treatment arms. Please see the arms section for more details. The primary and secondary objectives are listed below. Primary Objective: To test the hypothesis that laparoscopic-assisted resection for rectal cancer is not inferior to open rectal resection, based on a composite primary endpoint of oncologic factors which are indicative of a safe and feasible operation. Secondary Objectives: 1. To assess patient-related benefit of laparoscopic-assisted resection for rectal cancer vs. open rectal resection (blood loss, length of stay, pain medicine utilization) 2. To assess disease free survival and local pelvic recurrence at two years. 3. To assess quality of life, sexual function, bowel and stoma function at scheduled time points throughout the trial. Patients will be evaluated after surgery to determine the need for subsequent care based on the final pathology. Patients should not start treatment on any other investigative trial involving intervention or invasive diagnostic procedures ≤ 30 days following surgery to enable a complete evaluation of post-operative adverse events and complications occurring within 30 days of surgery. Patients are followed periodically for up to 5 years post surgery.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
August 2008
End Date
August 1, 2019
Last Updated
5 years ago
Study Type
Interventional
Study Design
Parallel
Sex
All

Investigators

Responsible Party
Sponsor

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Not provided

Exclusion Criteria

  • Not provided

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Comparing Laparoscopic-assisted Resection to Open Rectal Resection for Rectal Cancer as Measured by the Percentage of Patients With Successful Resection Based on Pathological Evaluation.

Time Frame: At time of Surgery

The primary endpoint will be a composite endpoint of oncologic factors which are indicative of an adequate surgical resection based on pathologic evaluation. Primary endpoint parameters: * Circumferential margin \> 1 mm * Negative distal margin * Completeness of total mesorectal excision (TME) A complete TME is a rectal resection specimen that has an intact mesorectum and covering peritoneal envelope all the way to the level of rectal transection with no coning in of the mesorectum above the point of transection. The surface of the peritoneal covering should be smooth and shiny with no defects exposing the underlying fat. All three criteria must be met for a resection to be deemed adequate. Laparoscopic-assisted resection will be compared to Open rectal resection to determine if it is non-inferior.

Secondary Outcomes

  • Quality of Life and Sexual Function(Up to 5 years post surgery)
  • Bowel and Stoma Function(Up to 5 years post surgery)
  • Circumferential Margin > 1 mm(At time of surgery)
  • Length of Stay(Two weeks post-surgery)
  • Completeness of Total Mesorectal Excision (Complete or Nearly Complete)(At time of surgery)
  • Disease-free Survival(Up to 2 years post surgery)
  • Local Pelvic Recurrence Rates(Up to 2 years post surgery)
  • Overall Survival(Up to 5 years post surgery)
  • Bowel Function(Up to 5 years post surgery)
  • Negative Distal Resected Margin(At time of surgery)
  • Use of Pain Medication(Two weeks post-surgery)
  • Operative Times(During surgery)

Study Sites (37)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials