Relevant Clinical Trials for GI Surgeons: a Review of Recent Findings

Abstract

Over the last decade, a number of practice-changing clinical trials have been published to guide the management of esophageal, gastric, liver, pancreas, appendiceal, and colorectal pathologies. The following review aims to provide a succinct summary of these important trials that merit further critical assessment by every gastrointestinal surgeon. After each review, per the Editors’ request, the authors have provided their humble opinion as to the clinical context and application of the data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

References

  1. 1.

    Fass R. Therapeutic options for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease. 2012;27(s3):3-7.

  2. 2.

    Spechler SJ, Hunter JG, Jones KM, et al. Randomized Trial of Medical versus Surgical Treatment for Refractory Heartburn. The New England journal of medicine. 2019;381(16):1513-1523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Werner YB, Hakanson B, Martinek J, et al. Endoscopic or Surgical Myotomy in Patients with Idiopathic Achalasia. 2019;381(23):2219-2229.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Stahl M, Walz MK, Riera-Knorrenschild J, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the oesophagogastric junction (POET): Long-term results of a controlled randomised trial. Eur J Cancer. 2017;81:183-190.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Shapiro J, van Lanschot JJB, Hulshof M, et al. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for oesophageal or junctional cancer (CROSS): long-term results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(9):1090-1098.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. The New England journal of medicine. 2006;355(1):11-20.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Al-Batran SE, Homann N, Pauligk C, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel versus fluorouracil or capecitabine plus cisplatin and epirubicin for locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4): a randomised, phase 2/3 trial. Lancet (London, England). 2019;393(10184):1948-1957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Noh SH, Park SR, Yang H-K, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin for gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy (CLASSIC): 5-year follow-up of an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology. 2014;15(12):1389-1396.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Macdonald JS, Smalley SR, Benedetti J, et al. Chemoradiotherapy after Surgery Compared with Surgery Alone for Adenocarcinoma of the Stomach or Gastroesophageal Junction. New England Journal of Medicine. 2001;345(10):725-730.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Lee J, Lim DH, Kim S, et al. Phase III trial comparing capecitabine plus cisplatin versus capecitabine plus cisplatin with concurrent capecitabine radiotherapy in completely resected gastric cancer with D2 lymph node dissection: the ARTIST trial. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(3):268-273.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Yu J, Huang C, Sun Y, et al. Effect of Laparoscopic vs Open Distal Gastrectomy on 3-Year Disease-Free Survival in Patients With Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: The CLASS-01 Randomized Clinical Trial. Jama. 2019;321(20):1983-1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Lee HJ, Hyung WJ, Yang HK, et al. Short-term Outcomes of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy With D2 Lymphadenectomy to Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer (KLASS-02-RCT). Ann Surg. 2019;270(6):983-991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Oh Y, Kim MS, Lee YT, Lee CM, Kim JH, Park S. Laparoscopic total gastrectomy as a valid procedure to treat gastric cancer option both in early and advanced stage: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020;46(1):33-43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Dematteo RP, Ballman KV, Antonescu CR, et al. Adjuvant imatinib mesylate after resection of localised, primary gastrointestinal stromal tumour: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2009;373(9669):1097-1104.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Joensuu H, Eriksson M, Sundby Hall K, et al. One vs Three Years of Adjuvant Imatinib for Operable Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor: A Randomized Trial. JAMA. 2012;307(12):1265-1272.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Raut CP, Espat NJ, Maki RG, et al. Efficacy and Tolerability of 5-Year Adjuvant Imatinib Treatment for Patients With Resected Intermediate- or High-Risk Primary Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor: The PERSIST-5 Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(12):e184060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Abstract LBA3 ‘IMbrave150: Efficacy and safety results from a ph III study evaluating atezolizumab (atezo) + bevacizumab (bev) vs sorafenib (Sor) as first treatment (tx) for patients (pts) with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)’. ESMO Asia Congress 2019.

  18. 18.

    Primrose JN, Fox RP, Palmer DH, et al. Capecitabine compared with observation in resected biliary tract cancer (BILCAP): a randomised, controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(5):663-673.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Ben-Josef E, Guthrie KA, El-Khoueiry AB, et al. SWOG S0809: A Phase II Intergroup Trial of Adjuvant Capecitabine and Gemcitabine Followed by Radiotherapy and Concurrent Capecitabine in Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(24):2617-2622.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Shroff RT, Javle MM, Xiao L, et al. Gemcitabine, Cisplatin, and nab-Paclitaxel for the Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers: A Phase 2 Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(6):824-830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Shroff RT, Kennedy EB, Bachini M, et al. Adjuvant Therapy for Resected Biliary Tract Cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline. 2019;37(12):1015-1027.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Neoptolemos JP, Dunn JA, Stocken DD, et al. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy in resectable pancreatic cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2001;358(9293):1576-1585.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Oettle H, Neuhaus P, Hochhaus A, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and long-term outcomes among patients with resected pancreatic cancer: the CONKO-001 randomized trial. Jama. 2013;310(14):1473-1481.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Neoptolemos JP, Palmer DH, Ghaneh P, et al. Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. The Lancet. 2017;389(10073):1011-1024.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Conroy T, Hammel P, Hebbar M, et al. FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine as Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer. 2018;379(25):2395-2406.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Von Hoff DD, Ervin T, Arena FP, et al. Increased Survival in Pancreatic Cancer with nab-Paclitaxel plus Gemcitabine. 2013;369(18):1691-1703.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Versteijne E, Suker M, Groothuis K, et al. Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Versus Immediate Surgery for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Results of the Dutch Randomized Phase III PREOPANC Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2020:Jco1902274.

  28. 28.

    de Rooij T, van Hilst J, van Santvoort H, et al. Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): A Multicenter Patient-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann Surg. 2019;269(1):2-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Palanivelu C, Senthilnathan P, Sabnis SC, et al. Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for periampullary tumours. The British journal of surgery. 2017;104(11):1443-1450.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Poves I, Burdio F, Morato O, et al. Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes Between Laparoscopic and Open Approach for Pancreatoduodenectomy: The PADULAP Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann Surg. 2018;268(5):731-739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    van Hilst J, de Rooij T, Bosscha K, et al. Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours (LEOPARD-2): a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial. The lancet Gastroenterology & hepatology. 2019;4(3):199-207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Kooby DA, Gillespie T, Bentrem D, et al. Left-sided pancreatectomy: a multicenter comparison of laparoscopic and open approaches. Ann Surg. 2008;248(3):438-446.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Mehta VV, Fisher SB, Maithel SK, Sarmiento JM, Staley CA, Kooby DA. Is it time to abandon routine operative drain use? A single institution assessment of 709 consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216(4):635-642; discussion 642-634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Salminen P, Tuominen R, Paajanen H, et al. Five-Year Follow-up of Antibiotic Therapy for Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis in the APPAC Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2018;320(12):1259-1265.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Sippola S, Gronroos J, Tuominen R, et al. Economic evaluation of antibiotic therapy versus appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis from the APPAC randomized clinical trial. The British journal of surgery. 2017;104(10):1355-1361.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, et al. Effect of Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery on Risk of Conversion to Open Laparotomy Among Patients Undergoing Resection for Rectal Cancer: The ROLARR Randomized Clinical Trial. Jama. 2017;318(16):1569-1580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Vennix S, Musters GD, Mulder IM, et al. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis: a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial. Lancet (London, England). 2015;386(10000):1269-1277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Schultz JK, Yaqub S, Wallon C, et al. Laparoscopic Lavage vs Primary Resection for Acute Perforated Diverticulitis: The SCANDIV Randomized Clinical Trial. Jama. 2015;314(13):1364-1375.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Kohl A, Rosenberg J, Bock D, et al. Two-year results of the randomized clinical trial DILALA comparing laparoscopic lavage with resection as treatment for perforated diverticulitis. The British journal of surgery. 2018;105(9):1128-1134.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Oberkofler CE, Rickenbacher A, Raptis DA, et al. A multicenter randomized clinical trial of primary anastomosis or Hartmann’s procedure for perforated left colonic diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis. Ann Surg. 2012;256(5):819-826; discussion 826-817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Bolkenstein HE, Consten ECJ, van der Palen J, et al. Long-term Outcome of Surgery Versus Conservative Management for Recurrent and Ongoing Complaints After an Episode of Diverticulitis: 5-year Follow-up Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (DIRECT-Trial). Ann Surg. 2019;269(4):612-620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Goere D, Glehen O, Quenet F, et al. Results of a randomized phase 3 study evaluating the potential benefit of a second-look surgery plus HIPEC in patients at high risk of developing colorectal peritoneal metastases (PROPHYLOCHIP- NTC01226394). 2018;36(15_suppl):3531-3531.

  43. 43.

    Klaver CEL, Wisselink DD, Punt CJA, et al. Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced colon cancer (COLOPEC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised trial. The lancet Gastroenterology & hepatology. 2019;4(10):761-770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Verwaal VJ, Bruin S, Boot H, van Slooten G, van Tinteren H. 8-year follow-up of randomized trial: cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus systemic chemotherapy in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(9):2426-2432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Quenet F, Elias D, Roca L, et al. A UNICANCER phase III trial of hyperthermic intra-peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC): PRODIGE 7. 2018;36(18_suppl):LBA3503-LBA3503.

Download references

Funding

This study was financially supported in part by The Abraham J. & Phyllis Katz Foun

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shishir K. Maithel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gamboa, A.C., Maithel, S.K. Relevant Clinical Trials for GI Surgeons: a Review of Recent Findings. J Gastrointest Surg (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-020-04676-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Gastrointestinal surgery
  • Clinical trials
  • Esophageal surgery
  • Gastric surgery
  • Hepatobiliary surgery
  • Colorectal surgery