| Literature DB >> 26784122 |
Yilin Li1, Jifang Gong1, Qiyue Zhang1, Zhihao Lu1, Jing Gao1, Yanyan Li1, Yanshuo Cao1, Lin Shen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study was intended to determine the clinical significance of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC), particularly the potential role of CTCs for dynamic monitoring of the therapeutic response.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26784122 PMCID: PMC4815805 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.417
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Prevalence of CTCs at baseline and their association with clinical characteristics (n=136)
| All AGCs | 136 | 76 (55.9) | 65 (47.8) | 57 (41.9) | 52 (38.2) | 48 (35.3) |
| Stomach | 85 | 49 (57.6) | 45 (52.9) | 42 (49.4) | 39 (45.9) | 37 (43.5) |
| Gastroesophageal junction | 51 | 27 (52.9) | 20 (39.2) | 15 (29.4) | 13 (25.5) | 11 (21.6) |
| ( | (0.593) | (0.121) | ||||
| Intestinal | 57 | 29 (50.9) | 25 (43.9) | 22 (38.6) | 20 (35.1) | 18 (31.6) |
| Diffuse | 42 | 24 (57.1) | 22 (52.4) | 20 (47.6) | 17 (40.5) | 15 (35.7) |
| Mixed | 32 | 20 (62.5) | 16 (50.0) | 13 (40.6) | 13 (40.6) | 13 (40.6) |
| ( | (0.556) | (0.682) | (0.657) | (0.816) | 0.689) | |
|
| ||||||
| Yes | 36 | 25 (69.4) | 20 (55.6) | 20 (55.6) | 20 (55.6) | 18 (50.0) |
| No | 100 | 51 (51.0) | 45 (45.0) | 37 (37.0) | 32 (32.0) | 30 (30.0) |
| ( | (0.186) | |||||
|
| ||||||
| Yes | 24 | 15 (62.5) | 12 (50.0) | 10 (41.7) | 11 (45.8) | 8 (33.3) |
| No | 112 | 61 (54.5) | 53 (47.3) | 46 (40.9) | 46 (41.1) | 44 (39.3) |
| ( | (0.313) | (0.494) | (0.605) | (0.417) | (0.382) | |
| Positive | 29 | 17 (58.6) | 16 (55.2) | 14 (48.3) | 14 (48.3) | 12 (41.4) |
| Negative | 101 | 55 (54.5) | 45 (44.6) | 40 (39.6) | 36 (35.6) | 34 (33.7) |
| ( | (0.691) | (0.313) | (0.404) | (0.218) | (0.444) | |
Abbreviations: AGC=advanced gastric cancer; HER2=human epidermal growth factor receptor 2.
Unless otherwise indicated.
The values highlighted in bold were statistically significant (P<0.05).
Five patients had unavailable Lauren classifications.
Six patients had unavailable HER2 status information.
CTCs and their correlation with response (n=106)
| Evaluable patients ( | 106 (100.0) | 45 (42.5) | 61 (57.5) | 26 (24.5) | 80 (75.5) |
| PR ( | 26 (24.5) | 11 (24.4) | 15 (24.6) | 2 (7.7) | 24 (30.0) |
| SD ( | 70 (66.0) | 28 (62.2) | 42 (68.8) | 18 (69.2) | 52 (65.0) |
| PD ( | 10 (9.4) | 6 (13.3) | 4 (6.6) | 6 (23.1) | 4 (5.1) |
| Overall response ( | 26 (24.5) | 11 (24.4) | 15 (24.6) | 2 (7.7) | 24 (30.0) |
| ( | (0.586) | (0.016) | |||
| Disease control ( | 96 (90.6) | 39 (86.7) | 57 (93.4) | 20 (76.9) | 76 (95.0) |
| ( | (0.199) | (0.013) | |||
Abbreviations: PD=progressive disease; PR=partial response; SD=stable disease.
Figure 1Kaplan–Meier curves for PFS (
Figure 2Relationship of imaging and CTCs to OS. (A) Kaplan–Meier curves for OS in patients who achieved PR, SD or PD responses as assessed by imaging. (B) Kaplan–Meier curves for OS based on a combination of CTC enumeration and imaging. The first follow-up indicates the time point following 6 weeks of chemotherapy. PD=progressive disease; non-PD includes PR or SD; PR=partial response; SD=stable disease.
Figure 3Correlation of changes in CTCs following therapy with PFS ( The patients were divided into four groups according to their changes in CTCs from baseline to post therapy. Group 1: <3 CTCs at baseline and post therapy; Group 2: <3 CTCs at baseline and ⩾3 CTCs post therapy; Group 3: ⩾3 CTCs at baseline and <3 CTCs post therapy; Group 4: ⩾3 CTCs at baseline and post therapy. The first follow-up indicates the time point following 6 weeks of chemotherapy.
Figure 4Longitudinal monitoring of CTC changes in response to therapy in patients 1–15. Patients 1, 3, 5, 7, 13, and 14 were still alive at the time of analysis. DDP=cisplatin; CAPE=capecitabine; T=trastuzumab; OXA=oxaliplatin; PTX=paclitaxel.