Yingnan Yang1, Zhuolong Tu1, Chentao Ye1, Huajie Cai1, Shouzhang Yang1, Xuehai Chen1, Jinfu Tu2. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Nanbaixiang Street, Ouhai District, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China. 2. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Nanbaixiang Street, Ouhai District, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China. tujinfu@sina.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gallbladder cancer is a rare but highly malignant cancer, which often progresses to a metastatic stage when diagnosed because of its asymptomatic manifestation. In this study, we intended to analyze the prognostic value of metastatic gallbladder adenocarcinoma (GBA) with site-specific metastases. METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, GBA patients diagnosed with metastases between 2010 and 2016 were selected to identify the prognosis according to the isolated metastatic sites, including liver, lung, bone, brain and distant lymph nodes (DL). Kaplan-Meier methods were used for survival comparisons and multivariable Cox regression models were constructed to find out independent factors that associated with survival. RESULTS: Data from 1526 eligible patients were extracted from the SEER database. Among the patients, 788 (51.6%) had isolated liver metastases, 80 (5.2%) had isolated distant nodal involvement, 45 (2.9%) had isolated lung metastases, 21 (1.4%) had isolated bone metastases, 2 (0.1%) had isolated brain metastases and 590 (38.7%) had multiple metastases. No significant survival difference was shown between patients with single or multisite metastases (P > 0.05). Patients with isolated lung or DL metastases had significant better survival outcomes than those with isolated bone metastases (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that performing surgery at primary site, receiving chemotherapy were associated with better OS and CSS for patients with isolated liver or DL metastases. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that different metastatic sites affect survival outcomes in metastatic GBA patients. Highly selected subset of patients with liver or DL metastases might benefit from surgery at primary site.
BACKGROUND:Gallbladder cancer is a rare but highly malignant cancer, which often progresses to a metastatic stage when diagnosed because of its asymptomatic manifestation. In this study, we intended to analyze the prognostic value of metastatic gallbladder adenocarcinoma (GBA) with site-specific metastases. METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, GBApatients diagnosed with metastases between 2010 and 2016 were selected to identify the prognosis according to the isolated metastatic sites, including liver, lung, bone, brain and distant lymph nodes (DL). Kaplan-Meier methods were used for survival comparisons and multivariable Cox regression models were constructed to find out independent factors that associated with survival. RESULTS: Data from 1526 eligible patients were extracted from the SEER database. Among the patients, 788 (51.6%) had isolated liver metastases, 80 (5.2%) had isolated distant nodal involvement, 45 (2.9%) had isolated lung metastases, 21 (1.4%) had isolated bone metastases, 2 (0.1%) had isolated brain metastases and 590 (38.7%) had multiple metastases. No significant survival difference was shown between patients with single or multisite metastases (P > 0.05). Patients with isolated lung or DL metastases had significant better survival outcomes than those with isolated bone metastases (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that performing surgery at primary site, receiving chemotherapy were associated with better OS and CSS for patients with isolated liver or DL metastases. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that different metastatic sites affect survival outcomes in metastatic GBApatients. Highly selected subset of patients with liver or DL metastases might benefit from surgery at primary site.
Authors: Samuel J Wang; Andrew Lemieux; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Celine B Ord; Gary V Walker; C David Fuller; Jong-Sung Kim; Charles R Thomas Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-11-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Aurelien Marabelle; Dung T Le; Paolo A Ascierto; Anna Maria Di Giacomo; Ana De Jesus-Acosta; Jean-Pierre Delord; Ravit Geva; Maya Gottfried; Nicolas Penel; Aaron R Hansen; Sarina A Piha-Paul; Toshihiko Doi; Bo Gao; Hyun Cheol Chung; Jose Lopez-Martin; Yung-Jue Bang; Ronnie Shapira Frommer; Manisha Shah; Razi Ghori; Andrew K Joe; Scott K Pruitt; Luis A Diaz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-11-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Samuel J Wang; C David Fuller; Jong-Sung Kim; Dean F Sittig; Charles R Thomas; Peter M Ravdin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-03-31 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Xavier M Keutgen; Naris Nilubol; Joanne Glanville; Samira M Sadowski; David J Liewehr; David J Venzon; Seth M Steinberg; Electron Kebebew Journal: Surgery Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Andrew J Lee; Yi-Ju Chiang; Jeffrey E Lee; Claudius Conrad; Yun-Shin Chun; Thomas A Aloia; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Ching-Wei D Tzeng Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2018-05-31 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Nan Sethakorn; Erika Heninger; Cristina Sánchez-de-Diego; Adeline B Ding; Ravi Chandra Yada; Sheena C Kerr; David Kosoff; David J Beebe; Joshua M Lang Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 6.639