Dataset Information

R0 resection in the treatment of gastric cancer: room for improvement.

ABSTRACT: Gastric carcinoma is one of the most frequent malignancies in the world and its clinical behavior especially depends on the metastatic potential of the tumor. In particular, lymphatic metastasis is one of the main predictors of tumor recurrence and survival, and current pathological staging systems reflect the concept that lymphatic spread is the most relevant prognostic factor in patients undergoing curative resection. This is compounded by the observation that two-thirds of gastric cancer in the Western world presents at an advanced stage, with lymph node metastasis at diagnosis. All current therapeutic efforts in gastric cancer are directed toward individualization of therapeutic protocols, tailoring the extent of resection and the administration of preoperative and postoperative treatment. The goals of all these strategies are to improve prognosis towards the achievement of a curative resection (R0 resection) with minimal morbidity and mortality, and better postoperative quality of life.

SUBMITTER: Biondi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2904881 | biostudies-other | 2010 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

R0 resection in the treatment of gastric cancer: room for improvement.

Biondi Alberto A Persiani Roberto R Cananzi Ferdinando F Zoccali Marco M Vigorita Vincenzo V Tufo Andrea A D'Ugo Domenico D

World journal of gastroenterology 20100701 27

Gastric carcinoma is one of the most frequent malignancies in the world and its clinical behavior especially depends on the metastatic potential of the tumor. In particular, lymphatic metastasis is one of the main predictors of tumor recurrence and survival, and current pathological staging systems reflect the concept that lymphatic spread is the most relevant prognostic factor in patients undergoing curative resection. This is compounded by the observation that two-thirds of gastric cancer in t ...[more]

PMID: 20632437

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by surgery currently offers promise as a strategy for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (GC). However, there is limited evidence to guide treatment for TRG 0 and 1 patients with locally advanced GC after R0 resection. This study set out to explore the optimal management for TRG 0 and 1 patients with locally advanced GC after R0 resection.MethodsThe retrospective data of 154 TRG 0 and 1 patients with locally advanced GC following R0 resection who were treated between January 2012 and December 2018 were collected and analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the survival rate. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model.ResultsThe median follow-up was 34.1 (range, 6.6-90.9) months. Six patients (3.9%) were lost during follow-up. Of the 27 patients who experienced relapse, 12 died, including 2 patients who died of non-neoplastic causes. The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and 5-year overall survival (OS) were 71.6% (95% CI: 68.5-79.6) and 82.9% (95% CI: 76.9-86.1) for the whole cohort, respectively. Univariate analysis revealed that patients with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) <5.0 ng/ml after NAC (77.7% vs. 20.1%, P<0.001), distal gastrectomy (91.7% vs. 67.5%, P=0.046) had higher 5-year RFS. Meanwhile, combined resection (55.6% vs. 73.1%, P=0.042), major complications (42.7% vs. 80.50%, P<0.001), and lymph node metastasis (ypN+) (52.0% vs. 83.7%, P<0.001) had lower 5-year RFS. The multivariate analysis showed that CEA level after NAC (HR =2.876, 95% CI: 1.051-7.872, P=0.040), major complications (HR =2.432, 95% CI: 1.062-5.567, P=0.035), and lymph node metastasis (ypN+) (HR =3.183, 95% CI: 1.242-8.161, P=0.016) were independent prognostic factors.ConclusionsTRG 0 and 1 patients with local GC after R0 resection following NAC had a good prognosis, especially patients with CEA <5.0 ng/mL after NAC, and those without major complications or lymph node metastasis. Monotherapy or no chemotherapy may offer options for treating TRG 0 and 1 patients without adverse prognostic factors.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies have shown that the all-cause mortality and non-colorectal cancer mortality of patients with fecal occult blood test (FOBT) positivity are significantly increased, implying that FOBT results may have more prognostic value.MethodsRetrospective analysis was performed for gastric cancer (GC) patients who underwent R0 gastrectomy from July 2007 to July 2014 at our hospital. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce confounding bias and a computerized technique for the nearest available score matching without replacement was applied. The cumulative survival rate was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and a log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards regression and logistic regression was used to determine the independent prognostic factors associated with survival and postoperative complications, respectively. The expression level of tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) and proinflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-6) were evaluated by immunohistochemical (IHC).ResultsA total of 3,003 patients were included and 246 patients (8.2%) were in preoperative FOBT positive status. There was no significant difference in demographic data between preoperative FOBT positive and negative group after a 1:4 PSM. The overall postoperative complications, major complications, and anastomotic leakage were significantly higher in the preoperative FOBT-positive group than in the preoperative FOBT-negative group. Moreover, preoperative FOBT-positivity was an independent risk factor for 5-year overall survival (OS) (HR: 1.32, p = 0.005). For stage II/III patients, the postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (PAC) benefit was found in preoperative FOBT-negative group (5-year OS: 49.9 vs. 36.8%, p = 0.001), whereas the PAC benefit was lost in preoperative FOBT-positive groups (5-year OS: 40.8 vs. 37.7% p = 0.896). Finally, IHC found that preoperative FOBT-positivity in patients was significantly associated with higher TAMs infiltration and higher expression of IL-6 and TNF-α in tumor tissues than in the preoperative FOBT-negative group.ConclusionAs a simple and low-cost method, preoperative FOBT results can predict both complications and survival after R0 gastrectomy for GC. More importantly, stage II/III GC patients with FOBT-positive seem not benefit from PAC alone. Further exploration is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundAn efficient diagnostic pathway and early stage diagnosis for cancer patients is widely pursued. This study aims to chart the duration of the diagnostic pathway for patients with symptomatic oesophageal and gastric cancer, to identify factors associated with long duration and to assess the association of duration with tumour stage at diagnosis.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study, using electronic health records of six routine primary care databases covering about 640,000 patients, partly linked to the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Symptomatic patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer (2010-2015) that presented in primary care were included. Duration of four diagnostic intervals was determined: patient interval; first symptoms to primary care consultation, primary care interval; consultation to referral, secondary care interval; referral to diagnosis, and the diagnostic interval; consultation to diagnosis. Characteristics associated with 'long duration' (≥P75 duration) were assessed using log-binomial regression. Median durations were stratified for tumour stages.ResultsAmong 312 symptomatic patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer, median durations were: patient interval: 29 days (interquartile interval 15-73), primary care interval: 12 days (interquartile interval 1-43), secondary care interval: 13 days (interquartile interval 6-29) and diagnostic interval: 31 days (11-74). Patient interval duration was comparable for patients with and without alarm symptoms. Absence of cancer-specific alarm symptoms was associated with 'long duration' of primary care interval and secondary care interval: relative risk 5.0 (95% confidence interval 2.7-9.1) and 2.1 (95% confidence interval 1.3-3.7), respectively. Median diagnostic interval duration for local stage disease was 51 days (interquartile interval 13-135) versus 27 days (interquartile interval 11-71) for advanced stage (p = 0.07).ConclusionIn the diagnostic pathway of upper gastrointestinal cancers, the longest interval is the patient interval. Reducing time to diagnosis may be achieved by improving patients' awareness of alarm symptoms and by diagnostic strategies which better identify cancer patients despite low suspicion.

Dataset Information

R0 resection in the treatment of gastric cancer: room for improvement.

Publications

R0 resection in the treatment of gastric cancer: room for improvement.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets