Journal of Gastric Cancer最新文献

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have provided novel tools for rapid and precise pathologic diagnosis. The introduction of digital pathology has enabled the acquisition of scanned slide images that are essential for the application of AI. The application of AI for improved pathologic diagnosis includes the error-free detection of potentially negligible lesions, such as a minute focus of metastatic tumor cells in lymph nodes, the accurate diagnosis of potentially controversial histologic findings, such as very well-differentiated carcinomas mimicking normal epithelial tissues, and the pathological subtyping of the cancers. Additionally, the utilization of AI algorithms enables the precise decision of the score of immunohistochemical markers for targeted therapies, such as human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 and programmed death-ligand 1. Studies have revealed that AI assistance can reduce the discordance of interpretation between pathologists and more accurately predict clinical outcomes. Several approaches have been employed to develop novel biomarkers from histologic images using AI. Moreover, AI-assisted analysis of the cancer microenvironment showed that the distribution of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes was related to the response to the immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, emphasizing its value as a biomarker. As numerous studies have demonstrated the significance of AI-assisted interpretation and biomarker development, the AI-based approach will advance diagnostic pathology.

Purpose: The incidence of early gastric cancer is increasing in older patients alongside life expectancy. For early gastric cancer of the upper third of the stomach, laparoscopic function-preserving gastrectomy (LFPG), including laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) and laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSTG), is expected to be an alternative to laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). However, whether LFPG has advantages over LTG in older patients remains unknown.

Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed data of consecutive patients aged ≥75 years who underwent LTG, LPG, or LSTG for cT1N0M0 gastric cancer between 2005 and 2019. Surgical and nutritional outcomes, including blood parameters, percentage body weight (%BW) and percentage skeletal muscle index (%SMI) were compared between LTG and LPG or LSTG. Survival outcomes were also compared between LTG and LFPG groups.

Results: A total of 111 patients who underwent LTG (n=39), LPG (n=48), and LSTG (n=24) were enrolled in this study. To match the surgical indications, LTG was further categorized into "LTG for LPG" (LTG-P) and "LTG for LSTG" (LTG-S). No significant differences were identified in the incidence of postoperative complications among the procedures. Postoperative nutritional parameters, %BW and %SMI were better after LPG and LSTG than after LTG-P and LTG-S, respectively. The survival outcomes of LFPG were better than those of LTG.

Conclusions: LFPG is safe for older patients and has advantages over LTG in terms of postoperative nutritional parameters, body weight, skeletal muscle-sparing, and survival. Therefore, LFPG for upper early gastric cancer should be considered in older patients.

Purpose: Oxaliplatin, a component of the capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) regimen, has a more favorable toxicity profile than cisplatin in patients with advanced gastric cancer (GC). However, oxaliplatin can induce sensory neuropathy and cumulative, dose-related toxicities. Thus, the capecitabine maintenance regimen may achieve the maximum treatment effect while reducing the cumulative neurotoxicity of oxaliplatin. This study aimed to compare the survival of patients with advanced GC between capecitabine maintenance and observation after 1st line XELOX chemotherapy.

Materials and methods: Sixty-three patients treated with six cycles of XELOX for advanced GC in six hospitals of the Catholic University of Korea were randomized 1:1 to receive capecitabine maintenance or observation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), analyzed using a two-sided log-rank test stratified at a 5% significance level.

Results: Between 2015 and 2020, 32 and 31 patients were randomized into the maintenance and observation groups, respectively. After randomization, the median number of capecitabine maintenance cycles was 6. The PFS was significantly higher in the maintenance group than the observation group (6.3 vs. 4.1 months, P=0.010). Overall survival was not significantly different between the 2 groups (18.2 vs. 16.5 months, P=0.624). Toxicities, such as hand-foot syndrome, were reported in some maintenance group patients. Maintenance treatment was a significant factor associated with PFS in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.472; 95% confidence interval, 0.250-0.890; P=0.020).

Conclusions: After 6 cycles of XELOX chemotherapy, capecitabine maintenance significantly prolonged PFS compared with observation, and toxicity was manageable. Maintenance treatment was a significant prognostic factor associated with PFS.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02289547.

Purpose: Although chylous ascites is a frequent complication of radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer, proper diagnostic criteria and optimal treatment strategies have not been established. This study aimed to identify the clinical features of chylous ascites and evaluate the treatment outcomes.

Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent radical gastrectomy between 2013 and 2019. Diagnosis was made when milky fluid or elevated triglyceride levels (≥100 mg/dL) appeared in the drains without a preceding infection. The clinical features, risk factors, and treatment outcomes were assessed according to the initial treatment modalities for fasting and non-fasting groups.

Results: Among the 7,388 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer, 156 (2.1%) experienced chylous ascites. The median length of hospital stay was longer in patients with chylous ascites than in those without (median [interquartile range]: 8.0 [6.0-12.0] vs. 6.0 [5.0-8.0], P<0.001). Low body mass index (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.9; P<0.001), advanced gastric cancer (aOR=1.51, P=0.024), open surgery (reference: laparoscopic surgery; aOR=1.87, P=0.003), and extent of surgical resection (reference: subtotal gastrectomy, total gastrectomy, aOR=1.5, P=0.029; proximal gastrectomy, aOR=2.93, P=0.002) were associated with the occurrence of chylous ascites. The fasting group (n=12) was hospitalized for a longer period than the non-fasting group (n=144) (15.0 [12.5-19.5] vs. 8.0 [6.0-10.0], P<0.001). There was no difference in grade III complication rate (16.7% vs. 4.2%, P=0.117) or readmission rate (16.7% vs. 11.1%, P=0.632) between the groups.

Conclusions: A fat-controlled diet and medication without fasting provided adequate initial treatment for chylous ascites after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Purpose: In this study, polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based microsatellite instability (MSI) testing was comprehensively analyzed and compared with immunohistochemistry (IHC) for mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression in patients with gastric cancer (GC).

Materials and methods: In 5,676 GC cases, PCR-based MSI testing using five microsatellites (BAT-26, BAT-25, D5S346, D2S123, and D17S250) and IHC for MLH1 were performed. Re-evaluation of MSI testing/MLH1 IHC and additional IHC for MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 were performed in discordant/indeterminate cases.

Results: Of the 5,676 cases, microsatellite stable (MSS)/MSI-low and intact MLH1 were observed in 5,082 cases (89.5%), whereas MSI-high (MSI-H) and loss of MLH1 expression were observed in 502 cases (8.8%). We re-evaluated the remaining 92 cases (1.6%) with a discordant/indeterminate status. Re-evaluation showed 1) 37 concordant cases (0.7%) (18 and 19 cases of MSI-H/MMR-deficient (dMMR) and MSS/MMR-proficient (pMMR), respectively), 2) 6 discordant cases (0.1%) (3 cases each of MSI-H/pMMR and MSS/dMMR), 3) 14 MSI indeterminate cases (0.2%) (1 case of dMMR and 13 cases of pMMR), and 4) 35 IHC indeterminate cases (0.6%) (22 and 13 cases of MSI-H and MSS, respectively). Finally, MSI-H or dMMR was observed in 549 cases (9.7%), of which 47 (0.8%) were additionally confirmed as MSI-H or dMMR by re-evaluation. Sensitivity was 99.3% for MSI testing and 95.4% for MMR IHC.

Conclusions: Considering the low incidence of MSI-H or dMMR, discordant/indeterminate results were occasionally identified in GCs, in which case complementary testing is required. These findings could help improve the accuracy of MSI/MMR testing in daily practice.

Purpose: Liver metastasis (LM) is reported in approximately 40% of patients with advanced/metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma; mGEA) and is associated with a worse prognosis. This post-hoc analysis from the RAINBOW trial reported the efficacy, safety, and biomarker outcomes of ramucirumab and paclitaxel combination treatment (RAM+PAC) in patients with (LM+) and without (LM-) LM at baseline.

Materials and methods: Patients (n=665) were randomly assigned on a 1:1 basis to receive either RAM+PAC (LM+: 150, LM-: 180) or placebo and paclitaxel (PL+PAC) (LM+: 138, LM-: 197). The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using stratified Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models. The correlation of dichotomized biomarkers (VEGF-C, D; VEGFR-1,2) with efficacy in the LM+ versus LM- subgroups was analyzed using the Cox regression model with reported interaction P-values.

Results: The presence of LM was associated with earlier progression than those without LM, particularly in patients receiving PL+PAC (hazard ratio [HR], 1.68). RAM+PAC treatment improved OS and PFS irrespective of LM status but showed greater improvement in LM+ than that in LM- (OS HR, 0.71 [LM+] vs. 0.88 [LM-]; PFS HR, 0.47 [LM+] vs. 0.76 [LM-]). Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between patients with and without LM. No predictive relationship was observed between biomarker levels (VEGF-C, D; VEGFR-1,2) and efficacy outcome (OS, PFS) (all interaction P-values >0.05).

Conclusions: RAM provided a significant benefit, irrespective of LM status; however, its effect was numerically stronger in patients with LM. Therefore, RAM+PAC is a clinically meaningful therapeutic option for patients with mGEA and LM.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01170663.

Purpose: This study aimed to examine the effects of 4 main types of gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer on postoperative symptoms, living status, and quality of life (QOL) using the Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale-45 (PGSAS-45).

Materials and methods: We surveyed 1,685 patients with upper one-third gastric cancer who underwent total gastrectomy (TG; n=1,020), proximal gastrectomy (PG; n=518), TG with jejunal pouch reconstruction (TGJP; n=93), or small remnant distal gastrectomy (SRDG; n=54). The 19 main outcome measures (MOMs) of the PGSAS-45 were compared using the analysis of means (ANOM), and the general QOL score was calculated for each gastrectomy type.

Results: Patients who underwent TG experienced the lowest postoperative QOL. ANOM showed that 10 MOMs were worse in patients with TG. Four MOMs improved in patients with PG, while 1 worsened. One MOM was improved in patients with TGJP versus 8 MOMs in patients with SRDG. The general QOL scores were as follows: SRDG (+39 points), TGJP (+6 points), PG (+3 points), and TG (-1 point).

Conclusions: The TG group experienced the greatest decline in postoperative QOL. SRDG and PG, which preserve part of the stomach without compromising curability, and TGJP, which is used when TG is required, enhance the postoperative QOL of patients with proximal gastric cancer. When selecting the optimal gastrectomy method, it is essential to understand the characteristics of each and actively incorporate guidance to improve postoperative QOL.

Background: There are no clear guidelines to determine whether to perform D1 or D1+ lymph node dissection in early gastric cancer (EGC). This study aimed to develop a nomogram for estimating the risk of extraperigastric lymph node metastasis (LNM).

Materials and methods: Between 2009 and 2019, a total of 4,482 patients with pathologically confirmed T1 disease at 6 affiliated hospitals were included in this study. The basic clinicopathological characteristics of the positive and negative extraperigastric LNM groups were compared. The possible risk factors were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analyses. Based on these results, a risk prediction model was developed. A nomogram predicting extraperigastric LNM was used for internal validation.

Results: Multivariate analyses showed that tumor size (cut-off value 3.0 cm, odds ratio [OR]=1.886, P=0.030), tumor depth (OR=1.853 for tumors with sm2 and sm3 invasion, P=0.010), cross-sectional location (OR=0.490 for tumors located on the greater curvature, P=0.0303), differentiation (OR=0.584 for differentiated tumors, P=0.0070), and lymphovascular invasion (OR=11.125, P<0.001) are possible risk factors for extraperigastric LNM. An equation for estimating the risk of extraperigastric LNM was derived from these risk factors. The equation was internally validated by comparing the actual metastatic rate with the predicted rate, which showed good agreement.

Conclusions: A nomogram for estimating the risk of extraperigastric LNM in EGC was successfully developed. Although there are some limitations to applying this model because it was developed based on pathological data, it can be optimally adapted for patients who require curative gastrectomy after endoscopic submucosal dissection.

This corrects the article on p. 3 in vol. 23, PMID: 36750993.