Literature DB >> 32354915

Prognostic Impact of Lymph Node Ratio in Patients Undergoing Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Curative Resection for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

Wonguen Jung1, Kyubo Kim2, Jiyoung Kim1, Su Jung Shim3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIM: To analyze the prognostic significance of nodal status in patients undergoing preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by curative resection for locally advanced rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2000 and 2015, 80 consecutive patients with rectal cancer underwent preoperative CRT followed by curative resection. The lymph node ratio (LNR) was defined as the number of positive lymph nodes (LNs) divided by the examined LNs, and log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS) was the log of the ratio between positive and negative LNs. The prognostic value of these indicators was evaluated in terms of overall (OS) and disease-free (DFS) survival.
RESULTS: The median follow-up period for patients overall was 59 months (range=11-190 months). The median number of examined LNs and number of positive LNs were 10 (range=1-29) and 2 (range=1-27), respectively, and the median LNR and LODDS values were 0.0 (range=0.0-0.96) and -1.0 (range=-1.7-1.3), respectively. The 5-year OS and DFS were 83% and 64%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, LNR was an independent prognostic factor in terms OS (p=0.041) but not for DFS (p=0.075). LODDS was not significantly associated with OS or DFS. In patients with clinical stage III rectal cancer, LNR was significantly associated with OS and DFS when the number of evaluated LNs was greater than 12 (p=0.038 for OS, p=0.006 for DFS).
CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that LNR is a more effective prognostic factor than LODDS in terms of predicting survival. LNR was a significant predictor for survival for patients with clinical stage III rectal cancer with >12 harvested LNs. Copyright
© 2020, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Rectal cancer; chemoradiotherapy; log odds of positive lymph nodes; lymph node; lymph node ratio; prognosis

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32354915      PMCID: PMC7279814          DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11898

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  In Vivo        ISSN: 0258-851X            Impact factor:   2.155


  24 in total

1.  The prognosis of T3N0 colon cancer is dependent on the number of lymph nodes examined.

Authors:  Richard S Swanson; Carolyn C Compton; Andrew K Stewart; Kirby I Bland
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2003 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Increasing negative lymph node count is independently associated with improved long-term survival in stage IIIB and IIIC colon cancer.

Authors:  Paul M Johnson; Geoff A Porter; Rocco Ricciardi; Nancy N Baxter
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Metastatic axillary lymph node ratio (LNR) is prognostically superior to pN staging in patients with breast cancer--results for 804 Chinese patients from a single institution.

Authors:  Xiang-Sheng Xiao; Hai-Lin Tang; Xin-Hua Xie; Lai-Sheng Li; Ya-Nan Kong; Min-Qing Wu; Lu Yang; Jie Gao; Wei-Dong Wei; Xiaoming Xie
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2013

4.  Colorectal cancer statistics, 2017.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Kimberly D Miller; Stacey A Fedewa; Dennis J Ahnen; Reinier G S Meester; Afsaneh Barzi; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  Prognostic impact of the lymph node ratio in rectal cancer patients who underwent preoperative chemoradiation.

Authors:  Jeonghyun Kang; Hyuk Hur; Byung Soh Min; Kang Young Lee; Nam Kyu Kim
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-03-17       Impact factor: 3.454

6.  LODDS is superior to lymph node ratio for the prognosis of node-positive rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative radiotherapy.

Authors:  Ben Huang; Mengdong Ni; Chen Chen; Guoxiang Cai; Sanjun Cai
Journal:  Tumori       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 2.098

7.  Qualitative and quantitative issues of lymph nodes as prognostic factor in colon cancer.

Authors:  Torhild Veen; Bjørn S Nedrebø; Kjartan Stormark; Jon Arne Søreide; Hartwig Kørner; Kjetil Søreide
Journal:  Dig Surg       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 2.588

8.  The prognostic superiority of log odds of positive lymph nodes in stage III colon cancer.

Authors:  Jiping Wang; James M Hassett; Merril T Dayton; Mahmoud N Kulaylat
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2008-08-16       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  A new TNM staging strategy for node-positive (stage III) colon cancer: an analysis of 50,042 patients.

Authors:  Frederick L Greene; Andrew K Stewart; H James Norton
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Ratios of involved nodes in early breast cancer.

Authors:  Vincent Vinh-Hung; Claire Verschraegen; Donald I Promish; Gábor Cserni; Jan Van de Steene; Patricia Tai; Georges Vlastos; Mia Voordeckers; Guy Storme; Melanie Royce
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2004-10-06       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  3 in total

1.  Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in resectable rectal cancer after preoperative short-course radiotherapy-results from randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Radoslaw Pach; Antoni M Szczepanik; Marek Sierzega; Michal Daniluk; Piotr Richter
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2022-07-04       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  Log odds of positive lymph nodes as a novel prognostic predictor for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yiding Li; Guiling Wu; Yujie Zhang; Ben Han; Wanli Yang; Xiaoqian Wang; Lili Duan; Liaoran Niu; Junfeng Chen; Wei Zhou; Jinqiang Liu; Daiming Fan; Liu Hong
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 4.430

3.  Construction of a new clinical staging system for colorectal cancer based on the lymph node ratio: A validation study.

Authors:  Yan Yang; Yawei Wang; Zhengbin Wang
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-08-25
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.