Phase III trial to confirm the superiority of pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy to pelvic lymphadenectomy alone for endometrial cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study 1412 (SEPAL-P3).

To prospectively investigate the survival benefit of para-aortic lymphadenectomy, we launched a new study, the JCOG1412. This is a randomized Phase III trial to confirm the superiority of pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy to pelvic lymphadenectomy alone. Patients corresponding to possible FIGO Stage IB, II, IIIA, IIIB, and a part of IIIC1 are eligible for the first registration before surgery. Next, those patients without evidence of para-aortic lymph node metastasis and multiple pelvic lymph node metastasis during surgery will be included in the second registration and randomized to either the pelvic lymphadenectomy alone arm or the pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy arm. After the initial surgery, patients with post-operative recurrence risks receive adjuvant chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints include relapse-free survival, short-term surgical outcomes, adverse events related to adjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence patterns. This trial has been registered at the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry [http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm] as UMIN000025399.

[1]  H. Yoshikawa,et al.  Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines 2013 for the treatment of uterine body neoplasms , 2016, International Journal of Clinical Oncology.

[2]  P. Dong,et al.  Distribution of Lymph Node Metastasis Sites in Endometrial Cancer Undergoing Systematic Pelvic and Para-Aortic Lymphadenectomy: A Proposal of Optimal Lymphadenectomy for Future Clinical Trials , 2014, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[3]  M. Kaneuchi,et al.  A Retrospective Analysis of Postoperative Complications With or Without Para-aortic Lymphadenectomy in Endometrial Cancer , 2011, International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer.

[4]  M. Kaneuchi,et al.  Survival effect of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (SEPAL study): a retrospective cohort analysis , 2010, The Lancet.

[5]  N. Sakuragi,et al.  Practice pattern for postoperative management of endometrial cancer in Japan: a survey of the Japanese Gynecologic Oncology Group. , 2009, Gynecologic oncology.

[6]  V. Torri,et al.  Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. , 2009, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[7]  S. Pecorelli Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium , 2009 .

[8]  M. Parmar,et al.  Efficacy of systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC trial): a randomised study , 2009, The Lancet.

[9]  N. Hacker,et al.  Systematic aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy versus resection of bulky nodes only in optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer: a randomized clinical trial. , 2005, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[10]  K. K. Lan,et al.  Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials , 1983 .

[11]  D. Schoenfeld,et al.  Nomograms for calculating the number of patients needed for a clinical trial with survival as an endpoint. , 1982, Biometrics.

[12]  Nobuyuki Susumu,et al.  Randomized phase III trial of pelvic radiotherapy versus cisplatin-based combined chemotherapy in patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer: a Japanese Gynecologic Oncology Group study. , 2008, Gynecologic oncology.

[13]  J. Thigpen,et al.  Randomized phase III trial of whole-abdominal irradiation versus doxorubicin and cisplatin chemotherapy in advanced endometrial carcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.