Literature DB >> 16944539

Surgical pathology stage by American Joint Commission on Cancer criteria predicts patient survival after preoperative chemoradiation for localized gastric carcinoma.

Pooja R Rohatgi1, Paul F Mansfield, Christopher H Crane, Tsung-Teh Wu, Punita K Sunder, William A Ross, Jeffrey S Morris, Peter W Pisters, Barry W Feig, Leonard L Gunderson, Jaffer A Ajani.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Preoperative chemoradiation for localized gastric cancer can modify baseline stage, as determined by surgical pathology stage. Therefore, the authors hypothesized that surgical pathology stage would be a better prognosticator of overall survival (OS) than baseline stage.
METHODS: Patient populations were combined from 2 prospectively conducted, preoperative chemoradiation trials that used the same therapeutic strategy. Patients must have had localized gastric adenocarcinoma and were staged extensively, including endoscopic ultrasonography and laparoscopy. Patients had to be fit for surgery medically with a technically resectable cancer. All patients provided written informed consent. Patients first received induction chemotherapy for up to 2 months followed by chemoradiation (45 grays) and an attempted surgery. OS was correlated with pretreatment and posttreatment parameters, including surgical pathology stage according to American Joint Commission on Cancer criteria.
RESULTS: Of 74 patients who were registered, 69 patients (93%) had undergone surgery. Nineteen patients (26%) had a pathologic complete response (pathCR), and 55 patients (81%) had a curative (R0) resection. None of the pretreatment parameters correlated with OS; however, longer OS correlated with lower pathologic stage (P < .0001), R0 resection (P < .001), clinical response noted prior to surgery (P = .002), pathCR (P = .004), lower pathologic lymph node classification (P = .006), and lower pathologic tumor classification (P = .03). Pathologic stage and R0 resection were independent prognostic factors for OS (multivariate Cox model; both P = .05).
CONCLUSIONS: When preoperative chemoradiation strategy was employed for gastric cancer, the surgical pathology stage, a reflection of cancer's biologic heterogeneity, was a better prognosticator of OS than the baseline clinical stage. Surgical pathology stage, in this setting, may serve as an intermediate endpoint for Phase II/III trials. (c) 2006 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16944539     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22180

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  13 in total

1.  [Response prediction--early response evaluation. Consequences for surgical oncology].

Authors:  J R Siewert; F Lordick
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 0.955

2.  The newly proposed clinical and post-neoadjuvant treatment staging classifications for gastric adenocarcinoma for the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging.

Authors:  Haejin In; Ethan Ravetch; Marisa Langdon-Embry; Bryan Palis; Jaffer A Ajani; Wayne L Hofstetter; David P Kelsen; Takeshi Sano
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 7.370

3.  Histopathologic Features are more Important Prognostic Factors than Primary Tumour Location in Gastro-oesophageal Adenocarcinoma Treated with Preoperative Chemoradiation and Surgery.

Authors:  Milan Vošmik; Jan Laco; Igor Sirák; Josef Dvořák; Petr Lochman; Miroslav Hodek; Petra Malá; Stanislav Rejchrt; Rudolf Repák; Michal Leško; Alexander Ferko; Aleš Ryška; Bohuslav Melichar; Jiří Petera
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2017-05-27       Impact factor: 3.201

Review 4.  Proteomic and metabolic prediction of response to therapy in gastric cancer.

Authors:  Michaela Aichler; Birgit Luber; Florian Lordick; Axel Walch
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Factors predicting prognosis and recurrence in patients with esophago-gastric adenocarcinoma and histopathological response with less than 10 % residual tumor.

Authors:  Katja Ott; Susanne Blank; Karen Becker; Rupert Langer; Wilko Weichert; Wilfried Roth; Leila Sisic; Annika Stange; Dirk Jäger; Markus Büchler; Jörg-Rüdiger Siewert; Florian Lordick
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 6.  Towards curative therapy in gastric cancer: Faraway, so close!

Authors:  Marília Cravo; Catarina Fidalgo; Rita Garrido; Tânia Rodrigues; Gonçalo Luz; Carolina Palmela; Marta Santos; Fábio Lopes; Rui Maio
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-11-07       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Concurrent Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Siewert II and III Adenocarcinoma at Gastroesophageal Junction.

Authors:  Qun Zhao; Yong Li; Jun Wang; Jun Zhang; Xueying Qiao; Bibo Tan; Yuan Tian; Gaofeng Shi; Qian Xu; Ruxun Li; Yueping Liu; Peigang Yang
Journal:  Am J Med Sci       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.378

8.  Pathologic and oncologic outcomes in locally advanced gastric cancer with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Ji Yeong An; Hyoung-Il Kim; Jae-Ho Cheong; Woo Jin Hyung; Choong Bae Kim; Sung Hoon Noh
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 2.759

9.  Can we understand the clinical biology of gastric cancer and exploit it? May be, but it is a challenge!

Authors:  Jaffer A Ajani
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2007-10-12       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 10.  Clinical management of gastroesophageal junction tumors: past and recent evidences for the role of radiotherapy in the multidisciplinary approach.

Authors:  Francesco Cellini; Alessio G Morganti; Francesco M Di Matteo; Gian Carlo Mattiucci; Vincenzo Valentini
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.