Excisional treatment comparison for in situ endocervical adenocarcinoma (EXCISE): A phase 2 pilot randomized controlled trial to compare histopathological margin status, specimen size and fragmentation after loop electrosurgical excision procedure and cold knife cone biopsy.

OBJECTIVE: Adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) of the cervix is a precursor to cervical adenocarcinoma. When AIS is detected by cervical screening an excision biopsy is mandatory to exclude invasion. We aimed to compare margins status, specimen size and fragmentation after loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) and 'cold knife cone biopsy' (CKC). METHODS: The EXCISE Trial was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, phase 2, randomized study. Patients were enrolled at seven hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. We randomly assigned women aged ≥18 to ≤45 years with screen detected AIS to LEEP or CKC. Co-primary endpoints were margin status, specimen size and fragmentation. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. RESULTS: Between August 2, 2017 and September 6, 2019, 40 patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to LEEP or CKC. Margin status was evaluable in 36 cases. The proportion of patients with involved margins did not differ between groups. 25 of 26 LEEP and all 14 CKC biopsies were excised as single specimens (p = 1·00). There were no differences in specimen dimensions. Patients in the CKC group had more post-operative complications (64.3% compared to 15.4% for LEEP p = ·00). There were no differences in grade three complications (p = ·65). CONCLUSIONS: LEEP was not associated with a greater likelihood of positive margins, specimen fragmentation or smaller excision compared to CKC when performed according to a standardized protocol. However, the study was not powered to establish non-inferiority of LEEP and a definitive phase 3 trial to compare margin status and rates of treatment failure after LEEP and CKC is warranted.

Excisional treatment in women with cervical adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS): a prospective randomised controlled non-inferiority trial to compare AIS persistence/recurrence after loop electrosurgical excision procedure with cold knife cone biopsy: protocol for a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) of the uterine cervix is the precursor to invasive endocervical adenocarcinoma. An excisional biopsy such as a cold knife cone biopsy (CKC) should be performed to exclude invasive adenocarcinoma. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) is an alternative modality to CKC but is controversial in AIS. There is a perception that there is a greater likelihood of incomplete excision of AIS with LEEP because the depth of excised tissue tends to be smaller and the tissue margins may show thermal artefact which can interfere with pathology assessment. In the USA, guidelines recommend that any treatment modality can be used to excise AIS, provided that the specimen remains intact with interpretable margins. However, there are no high-quality studies comparing LEEP with CKC and well-designed prospective studies are needed. If such a study were to show that LEEP was non-inferior to CKC for the outcomes of post-treatment persistence, recurrence and adenocarcinoma, LEEP could be recommended as an appropriate treatment option for AIS in selected patients. This would benefit women because, unlike CKC, LEEP does not require general anaesthesia and may be associated with reduced morbidity. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The proposed exploratory study is a parallel group trial with an allocation ratio of 2:1 in favour of the intervention (LEEP: CKC). Participants are women aged ≥18 to ≤45 years diagnosed with AIS on cervical screening and/or colposcopically directed biopsy in Australia and New Zealand, who are to receive excisional treatment in a tertiary level centre. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the study has been granted by the St John of God Healthcare Human Research Ethics Committee (reference number #1137). Results from the study will be presented at conferences and published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. REGISTRATION: ANZCTR registration number ACTRN12617000132347 https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372173&isReview=true.