| Literature DB >> 23787075 |
Chun-Wei Peng1, Lin-Wei Wang, Min Fang, Gui-Fang Yang, Yan Li, Dai-Wen Pang.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Given the complexity of tumor microenvironment, no single marker from cancer cells could adequately predict the clinical outcomes of gastric cancer (GC). The objective of this study was to evaluate the prognostic role of combined features including conventional pathology, proteinase and immune data in GC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23787075 PMCID: PMC3691667 DOI: 10.1186/1479-5876-11-153
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Patients’ demographics and clinico-pathological characteristics
| Age (M ± SD, yrs) | 57.9 ± 12.9 |
| Gender | |
| Male (%) | 132 (71.7) |
| Female (%) | 52 (28.3) |
| Tumor location | |
| Distal stomach (%) | 98 (53.3) |
| Non-distal stomach (%) | 86 (46.7) |
| Pathological types | |
| Adenocarcinoma | |
| Histological grade 1/2 | 55 (29.9) |
| Well/Moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma (%) | 55 (29.9) |
| Histological grade 3/4 | 124 (67.4) |
| Low/Undifferentiated adenocarcinoma (%) | 102 (55.4) |
| Mucinous adenocarcinoma/signet-ring cell carcinoma | 22 (12.0) |
| Others a (%) | 5 (2.7) |
| Serosa invasion | |
| No (T0, T1, T2) (%) | 27 (14.7) |
| Yes (T3, T4) (%) | 157 (85.3) |
| Lymph node metastasis | |
| No (N0) (%) | 53 (28.8) |
| Yes (N1, N2, N3) (%) | 131 (71.2) |
| LNR, Median (Range) | 0.33 (0-1) |
| Distant Metastasis | |
| M0 (%) | 177 (96.2) |
| M1 (%) | 7 (3.8) |
| TNM stages | |
| Early (Stages I, II) (%) | 58 (31.5) |
| Advanced (Stages III, IV) (%) | 126 (68.5) |
| Surgery | |
| Subtotal resection (%) | 159 (86.4) |
| Non-Subtotal resection (%) | 25 (13.6) |
| Chemotherapy | |
| No (%) | 35 (19.0) |
| Yes (%) | 149 (81.0) |
| Recurrence | |
| No (%) | 124 (67.4) |
| Yes (%) | 60 (32.6) |
| Recurrence location b | |
| Local-regional | 37 (61.7) |
| Distant | 23 (38.3) |
| Clinical status at the end of the follow up | |
| Live and without recurrence | 72 (39.1) |
| Dead or alive with recurrence | 112 (60.9) |
| MT1-MMP expression | |
| Negative | 46 (33.3) |
| Positive | 138 (66.7) |
| CD11b + immunocytes (cells/mm2) | |
| Median (range) | 257 (4-2101) |
a Others included adenosquamous carcinoma in 3 (1.62%) cases, untypical carcinoid in 1 (0.54%) case, and neuroendocrine carcinoma in 1 (0.54%) case.b 60 recurrent cases were evaluated.
Figure 1Immunohistological findings in TMAs. (A-D) Representative example of MT1-MMP (A), CD11b + immunocytes (C) staining of a GC tissue microarray, and the corresponding digital image analyzed with the image software, with MT1-MMP (B) and CD11b + immunocytes (D) represented in red. (E,G) MT1-MMP staining was mainly in the cytoplasm or on the cell membrane of tumor cells (Blue arrow), and most of the stroma cells had negative staining, although sporadic positive staining on these cells was also observed (F,H). CD11b staining showed that CD11b + immunocytes mainly infiltrated into the juncture of cancer nest and stroma, especially at the invasive front (Red and Green arrows).
The relationship between MT1-MMP, CD11b + immunocytes density and cinico-pathological features
| | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (yrs) | ||||||
| <60 | 26 (56.5) | 20 (43.5) | 0.669 | 43 (43.4) | 56 (56.6) | 0.055 |
| ≥60 | 73 (52.9) | 65 (47.1) | 49 (57.6) | 36 (42.4) | ||
| Gender | ||||||
| Male | 33 (25.0) | 99 (75.0) | 1.000 | 66 (50.0) | 66 (50.0) | 1.000 |
| Female | 13 (25.0) | 39 (75.0) | 26 (50.0) | 26 (50.0) | ||
| Tumor size (cm2) a | ||||||
| <16 | 12 (16.4) | 61 (83.6) | 0.007 | 35 (47.9) | 38 (52.1) | 0.404 |
| ≥16 | 31 (35.2) | 57 (64.8) | 48 (54.5) | 40 (45.5) | ||
| Location | ||||||
| Distal | 18 (18.4) | 80 (81.6) | 0.027 | 51 (52.0) | 47 (48.0) | 0.555 |
| Non-distal | 28 (32.6) | 58 (67.4) | 41 (47.7) | 45 (52.3) | ||
| Histological grade b | ||||||
| 1/2 | 13 (23.6) | 42 (76.4) | 0.845 | 24 (43.6) | 31(56.4) | 0.376 |
| 3/4 | 31 (25.0) | 93 (75.0) | 63 (50.8) | 61 (49.2) | ||
| Lymph node metastasis | ||||||
| Yes | 31 (23.7) | 100 (76.3) | 0.511 | 73 (55.7) | 58 (44.3) | 0.015 |
| No | 15 (28.3) | 38 (71.7) | 19 (35.8) | 34 (64.2) | ||
| LNR c | ||||||
| ≤0.33 | 27 (28.7) | 67 (71.3) | 0.233 | 39 (41.5) | 55 (58.5) | 0.018 |
| >0.33 | 19 (21.1) | 71 (78.9) | 53 (58.9) | 37 (41.1) | ||
| Serosa invasion (T stage) | ||||||
| T1-2 | 4 (14.8) | 23 (85.2) | 0.186 | 10 (37.0) | 17 (63.0) | 0.145 |
| T3-4 | 42 (26.8) | 115 (73.2) | 82 (52.2) | 75 (47.8) | ||
| TNM staging | ||||||
| Early (I, II) | 13 (22.4) | 45 (77.6) | 0.583 | 21 (36.2) | 37 (63.8) | 0.011 |
| Advanced (III, IV) | 33 (26.2) | 93 (73.8) | 71 (56.3) | 55 (43.7) | ||
| Recurrence | ||||||
| Yes | 9 (15.0) | 51 (85.0) | 0.029 | 30 (50.0) | 30 (50.0) | 1.000 |
| No | 37 (29.8) | 87 (70.2) | 62 (50.0) | 62 (50.0) | ||
| Recurrence location d | ||||||
| Local-regional | 7 (18.9) | 30 (81.1) | 0.460 | 20 (54.1) | 17 (45.9) | 0.426 |
| Distant | 2 (8.7) | 21 (91.3) | 10 (43.5) | 13 (56.5) | ||
a Analysis was performed based on 161 patients with complete data of tumor size (TS).b Analysis was performed based on 179 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma.c The median of lymph node ratio (LNR) was 0.33 (6 cases), and GC cases were different in distinct subgroups. d 60 recurrent cases were included.
Figure 2Cumulative OS of GC patients. (A) OS of 184 GC patients. (B) Low CD11b + immunocytes density was related to poor OS. (C) Patients in MT1-MMP positive group were at higher risk for death. (D, E) Both lymph nodes status and LNR were correlated with poor OS, but LNR could better differentiate patient subgroups. (F) Combined Features could indicate OS of GC patients more accurately.
Analyses of factors regarding OS
| Age (yrs) | ||||||
| <60 | 99 | 52 (52.5) | 30.1 (1.5-99.5) | 45.1 | 3.584 | 0.058 |
| ≥60 | 85 | 56 (65.9) | 24.8 (0.8-102.3) | 28.6 | | |
| Gender | ||||||
| Male | 132 | 74 (56.1) | 30.3 (0.8-102.3) | 40.0 | 2.114 | 0.146 |
| Female | 52 | 34 (65.4) | 25.1 (1.3-94.8) | 30.3 | | |
| Tumor size (cm2) a | ||||||
| <16 | 73 | 35 (47.9) | 41.6 (1.1-99.5) | 52.9 | 7.882 | 0.005 |
| ≥16 | 88 | 57 (64.8) | 24.2 (0.8-102.3) | 29.2 | | |
| Histological grade b | ||||||
| 1/2 | 55 | 88 (56.1) | 30.1 (1.1-102.3) | 54.2 | 13.412 | <0.001 |
| 3/4 | 124 | 20 (74.1) | 16.8 (0.8-74.9) | 30.1 | | |
| Lymph nodes metastasis | ||||||
| Yes | 131 | 83 (63.4) | 24.8 (0.8-102.3) | 52.9 | 5.895 | 0.015 |
| No | 53 | 25 (47.2) | 34.1 (6.1-99.5) | 30.5 | | |
| Serosa invasion (T stage) | ||||||
| T1-2 | 27 | 7 (25.9) | 58.9 (20.2-99.5) | 74.9 | 14.742 | <0.001 |
| T3-4 | 157 | 101 (64.3) | 24.8 (0.8-102.3) | 30.8 | | |
| TNM | ||||||
| Early (I, II) | 58 | 26 (44.8) | 35.8 (6.1-99.5) | 54.0 | 9.823 | 0.002 |
| Advanced | 126 | 82 (65.1) | 22.8 (0.8-102.3) | 29.2 | | |
| (III, IV) | | | | | | |
| Surgery | ||||||
| SR | 159 | 89 (56.0) | 30.0 (0.8-102.3) | 39.8 | 5.902 | 0.015 |
| TR/CR | 25 | 19 (76.0) | 18.0 (3.8-89.9) | 21.8 | | |
| Chemotherapy | ||||||
| Yes | 149 | 87 (49.7) | 33.5 (5.3-99.5) | 35.9 | 0.016 | 0.900 |
| No | 35 | 21 (60.0) | 28.4 (0.8-102.3) | 40.0 | | |
| LNR c | ||||||
| ≤0.33 | 94 | 41 (43.6) | 38.8 (1.1-102.3) | 55.1 | 24.881 | <0.001 |
| >0.33 | 90 | 67 (74.4) | 20.1 (0.8-99.1) | 18.3 | | |
| MT1-MMP | ||||||
| Negative | 46 | 18 (39.1) | 35.7 (3.8-79.3) | 54.0 | 5.869 | 0.015 |
| Positive | 138 | 90 (65.2) | 25.4 (0.8-102.3) | 32.2 | | |
| CD11b + immunocytes density | ||||||
| Low | 92 | 62 (67.4) | 25.1 (0.8-99.1) | 27.6 | 4.655 | 0.031 |
| High | 92 | 46 (50.0) | 30.7 (1.3-102.3) | 46.7 | | |
| Combined features (MT1-MMP density, CD11b + immunocytes density and LNR) | ||||||
| Group I | 73 | 26 (35.6) | 38.7 (6.1-94.1) | 61.4 | 28.173 | <0.001 |
| Group II | 111 | 82 (73.9) | 18.1 (0.8-90.9) | 21.1 | ||
a Analysis was performed based on 161 patients with complete data of tumor size. b Analysis was performed based on 179 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. c The median of LNR was 0.33 (6 cases), and GC cases were different in distinct subgroups.OS: overall survival; SR: subtotal resection; TR: total resection; CR: combined resection; LNR: lymph node ratio.
Multivariate analyses of factors associated with OS
| Tumor size: <16 cm2 | 1.821 | 1.168-2.839 | 0.008 |
| Serosa invasion (T stage): | 3.232 | 1.440-7.251 | 0.004 |
| Lymoh nodes metastasis: | 1.012 | 0.610-1.679 | 0.964 |
| Surgery types: SR | 2.030 | 1.128-3.653 | 0.018 |
| LNR: low (≤0.33) vs High (>0.33) | 1.957 | 1.233-3.108 | 0.004 |
| MT1-MMP: Negative | 2.596 | 1.496-4.506 | 0.001 |
| CD11b + immunocytes density: High | 1.838 | 1.183-2.855 | 0.007 |
| Tumor size: <16 cm2 | 1.734 | 1.120 - 2.686 | 0.014 |
| Serosa invasion (T stage): | 3.013 | 1.360 - 6.674 | 0.007 |
| Lymoh nodes metastasis: | 0.696 | 0.404 - 1.200 | 0.192 |
| Surgery types: SR | 2.023 | 1.134 - 3.606 | 0.017 |
| Combined features: Group I | 3.818 | 2.223 - 6.557 | <0.001 |
OS: overall survival; HR: hazard ratio; NA: not adopted; SR: subtotal resection; TR: total resection; CR: combined resection; LNR: lymph node ratio.
Figure 3ROC analysis of the predictive value for death. Among the 4 independent prognostic factors, the area under the curve of the new combined feature was the largest one. The combined feature could have better prognostic performance in GC patients.