BACKGROUND: Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) as described by Siewert et al. is classified as one entity in the latest (7th Edition) American Joint Cancer Committee/International Union Against Cancer (AJCC/UICC) manual, compared with the previous mix of esophageal and gastric staging systems. The origin of AEG tumors, esophageal or gastric, and their biology remain controversial, particularly for AEG type II (cardia) tumors. METHODS: We adapted a large prospective database (n = 520: 180 type I, 182 type II, 158 type III) to compare AEG tumors under the new TNM system Pathological variables associated with prognosis were compared (pT, pN, stage, differentiation, R status, lymphovascular invasion, perineural involvement, number of positive nodes, percent of positive nodes, and tumor length), as well as overall survival. RESULTS: Compared with AEG type I tumors, type II and type III tumors had significantly (p < 0.05) more advanced pN stages, greater number and percentage of positive nodes, poorer differentiation, more radial margin involvement, and more perineural invasion. In AEG type I, 14/180 patients (8%) had >6 involved nodes (pN3), compared with 16 and 30% of patients classified type II and III, respectively. Median survival was significantly (p = 0.03) improved for type I patients (38 months) compared with those with tumors classified as type II (28 months) and type III (24 months). In multivariate analysis node positivity and pN staging but not AEG site had an impact on survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this series AEG type I is associated with more favorable pathologic features and improved outcomes compared with AEG type II and III. This may reflect earlier diagnosis, but an alternative possibility, that type I may be a unique paradigm with more favorable biology, requires further study.
BACKGROUND:Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) as described by Siewert et al. is classified as one entity in the latest (7th Edition) American Joint Cancer Committee/International Union Against Cancer (AJCC/UICC) manual, compared with the previous mix of esophageal and gastric staging systems. The origin of AEG tumors, esophageal or gastric, and their biology remain controversial, particularly for AEG type II (cardia) tumors. METHODS: We adapted a large prospective database (n = 520: 180 type I, 182 type II, 158 type III) to compare AEG tumors under the new TNM system Pathological variables associated with prognosis were compared (pT, pN, stage, differentiation, R status, lymphovascular invasion, perineural involvement, number of positive nodes, percent of positive nodes, and tumor length), as well as overall survival. RESULTS: Compared with AEG type I tumors, type II and type III tumors had significantly (p < 0.05) more advanced pN stages, greater number and percentage of positive nodes, poorer differentiation, more radial margin involvement, and more perineural invasion. In AEG type I, 14/180 patients (8%) had >6 involved nodes (pN3), compared with 16 and 30% of patients classified type II and III, respectively. Median survival was significantly (p = 0.03) improved for type I patients (38 months) compared with those with tumors classified as type II (28 months) and type III (24 months). In multivariate analysis node positivity and pN staging but not AEG site had an impact on survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this series AEG type I is associated with more favorable pathologic features and improved outcomes compared with AEG type II and III. This may reflect earlier diagnosis, but an alternative possibility, that type I may be a unique paradigm with more favorable biology, requires further study.
Authors: Jessica M Leers; Steven R DeMeester; Nadia Chan; Shahin Ayazi; Arzu Oezcelik; Emmanuele Abate; Farzaneh Banki; John C Lipham; Jeffrey A Hagen; Tom R DeMeester Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2009-07-14 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: John Vincent Reynolds; Cian Muldoon; Donal Hollywood; Narayanasamy Ravi; Suzanne Rowley; Ken O'Byrne; John Kennedy; Thomas J Murphy Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Andrew P Barbour; Nabil P Rizk; Mithat Gonen; Laura Tang; Manjit S Bains; Valerie W Rusch; Daniel G Coit; Murray F Brennan Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Stephen G Maher; Charles M Gillham; Shane P Duggan; Paul C Smyth; Nicola Miller; Cian Muldoon; Kenneth J O'Byrne; Orla M Sheils; Donal Hollywood; John V Reynolds Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Simone Giacopuzzi; Maria Bencivenga; Jacopo Weindelmayer; Giuseppe Verlato; Giovanni de Manzoni Journal: Gastric Cancer Date: 2016-12-30 Impact factor: 7.370
Authors: N J O'Farrell; J V Reynolds; N Ravi; J O Larkin; V Malik; G F Wilson; C Muldoon; D O'Toole Journal: Ir J Med Sci Date: 2012-12-16 Impact factor: 1.568