Effectiveness of radical systematic mediastinal lymphadenectomy in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer: results of a prospective randomized trial. Efficacy of systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC trial): a randomised study.
To evaluate the effectiveness of lymphadenectomy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
                The extent of lymphadenectomy in the treatment of NSCLC is still a matter of controversy. Although some centers perform mediastinal lymph node sampling (LS) with resection of only suspicious lymph nodes, others recommend a radical, systematic mediastinal lymphadenectomy (LA) to improve survival and to achieve a better staging.
                In a controlled, prospective, randomized clinical trial, the effects of LA on recurrence rates and survival were analyzed, comparing LS and LA in 169 patients with operable NSCLC.
                After a median follow-up of 47 months, LA did not improve survival in the overall group of patients (hazard ratio: 0.78; 95% confidence interval: 0.47-1.24). Although recurrences rates tended to be reduced among patients who underwent LA, these decreases were not statistically significant (hazard ratio: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.54-1.27). However, analysis of subgroups of patients according to histopathologic lymph node staging revealed that LA appears to prolong relapse-free survival (p = 0.037) with a borderline effect on overall survival (p = 0.058) in patients with limited lymph node involvement (pN1 disease or pN2 disease with involvement of only one lymph node level); in patients with pN0 disease, no survival benefit was observed.
                Radical systematic mediastinal lymphadenectomy does not influence disease-free or overall survival in patients with NSCLC and without overt lymph node involvement. However, a small subgroup of patients with limited mediastinal lymph node metastases might benefit from a systematic lymphadenectomy. Hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) is the standard surgery for stage I endometrial cancer. Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy has been used to establish whether there is extra-uterine disease and as a therapeutic procedure; however, randomised trials need to be done to assess therapeutic efficacy. The ASTEC surgical trial investigated whether pelvic lymphadenectomy could improve survival of women with endometrial cancer.
                From 85 centres in four countries, 1408 women with histologically proven endometrial carcinoma thought preoperatively to be confined to the corpus were randomly allocated by a minimisation method to standard surgery (hysterectomy and BSO, peritoneal washings, and palpation of para-aortic nodes; n=704) or standard surgery plus lymphadenectomy (n=704). The primary outcome measure was overall survival. To control for postsurgical treatment, women with early-stage disease at intermediate or high risk of recurrence were randomised (independent of lymph-node status) into the ASTEC radiotherapy trial. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN 16571884.
                After a median follow-up of 37 months (IQR 24-58), 191 women (88 standard surgery group, 103 lymphadenectomy group) had died, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.16 (95% CI 0.87-1.54; p=0.31) in favour of standard surgery and an absolute difference in 5-year overall survival of 1% (95% CI -4 to 6). 251 women died or had recurrent disease (107 standard surgery group, 144 lymphadenectomy group), with an HR of 1.35 (1.06-1.73; p=0.017) in favour of standard surgery and an absolute difference in 5-year recurrence-free survival of 6% (1-12). With adjustment for baseline characteristics and pathology details, the HR for overall survival was 1.04 (0.74-1.45; p=0.83) and for recurrence-free survival was 1.25 (0.93-1.66; p=0.14).
                Our results show no evidence of benefit in terms of overall or recurrence-free survival for pelvic lymphadenectomy in women with early endometrial cancer. Pelvic lymphadenectomy cannot be recommended as routine procedure for therapeutic purposes outside of clinical trials.
We found no evidence that lymphadenectomy decreases the risk of death or disease recurrence compared with no lymphadenectomy in women with presumed stage I disease. The evidence on serious adverse events suggests that women who receive lymphadenectomy are more likely to experience surgically related systemic morbidity or lymphoedema/lymphocyst formation.