Zhenghao Cai1,2, Haiqin Song1,2, Abe Fingerhut1,2,3, Jing Sun1,2, Junjun Ma1,2, Luyang Zhang1,2, Shuchun Li1,2, Chaoran Yu1,2, Minhua Zheng4,5, Lu Zang6,7. 1. Department of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No. 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, P. R. China. 2. Shanghai Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, Shanghai, P. R. China. 3. Section for Surgical Research, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 29, 8036, Graz, Austria. 4. Department of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No. 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, P. R. China. zmhtiger@yeah.net. 5. Shanghai Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, Shanghai, P. R. China. zmhtiger@yeah.net. 6. Department of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No. 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, P. R. China. zanglu@yeah.net. 7. Shanghai Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, Shanghai, P. R. China. zanglu@yeah.net.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of microsatellite status on lymph node (LN) yield during lymphadenectomy and pathological examination has never been assessed in gastric cancer (GC). In this study, we aimed to appraise the association between microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) and LN yield after curative gastrectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 1757 patients with GC undergoing curative gastrectomy and divided them into two groups: MSI-H (n = 185(10.5%)) and microsatellite stability (MSS) (n = 1572(89.5%)), using a five-Bethesda-marker (NR-24, BAT-25, BAT-26, CAT-25, MONO-27) panel. The median LN count and the percentage of specimens with a minimum of 16 LNs (adequate LN ratio) were compared between the two groups. The log odds (LODDS) of positive LN count (PLNC) to negative LN count (NLNC) and the target LN examined threshold (TLNT(x%)) were calculated in both groups. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found in the median LN count between MSI-H and MSS groups for the complete cohort (30 vs. 28, p = 0.031), for patients undergoing distal gastrectomy (DG) (30 vs. 27, p = 0.002), for stage II patients undergoing DG (34 vs. 28, p = 0.005), and for LN-negative patients undergoing DG (28 vs. 24, p = 0.002). MSI-H was an independent factor for higher total LN count in patients undergoing DG (p = 0.011), but it was not statistically correlated to the adequate LN ratio. Statistically significant differences in PLNC, NLNC and LODDS were found between MSI-H GC and MSS GC (all p < 0.001). The TLNT(90%) for MSI-H and MSS groups were 31 and 25, respectively. TLNT(X%) of MSI-H GC was always higher than that of MSS GC regardless of the given value of X%. CONCLUSIONS: MSI-H was associated with higher LN yield in patients undergoing gastrectomy for GC. Although MSI-H did not affect the adequacy of LN harvest, we speculate that a greater lymph node yield is required during pathological examination in MSI-H GC.
BACKGROUND: The impact of microsatellite status on lymph node (LN) yield during lymphadenectomy and pathological examination has never been assessed in gastric cancer (GC). In this study, we aimed to appraise the association between microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) and LN yield after curative gastrectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 1757 patients with GC undergoing curative gastrectomy and divided them into two groups: MSI-H (n = 185(10.5%)) and microsatellite stability (MSS) (n = 1572(89.5%)), using a five-Bethesda-marker (NR-24, BAT-25, BAT-26, CAT-25, MONO-27) panel. The median LN count and the percentage of specimens with a minimum of 16 LNs (adequate LN ratio) were compared between the two groups. The log odds (LODDS) of positive LN count (PLNC) to negative LN count (NLNC) and the target LN examined threshold (TLNT(x%)) were calculated in both groups. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found in the median LN count between MSI-H and MSS groups for the complete cohort (30 vs. 28, p = 0.031), for patients undergoing distal gastrectomy (DG) (30 vs. 27, p = 0.002), for stage II patients undergoing DG (34 vs. 28, p = 0.005), and for LN-negative patients undergoing DG (28 vs. 24, p = 0.002). MSI-H was an independent factor for higher total LN count in patients undergoing DG (p = 0.011), but it was not statistically correlated to the adequate LN ratio. Statistically significant differences in PLNC, NLNC and LODDS were found between MSI-H GC and MSS GC (all p < 0.001). The TLNT(90%) for MSI-H and MSS groups were 31 and 25, respectively. TLNT(X%) of MSI-H GC was always higher than that of MSS GC regardless of the given value of X%. CONCLUSIONS:MSI-H was associated with higher LN yield in patients undergoing gastrectomy for GC. Although MSI-H did not affect the adequacy of LN harvest, we speculate that a greater lymph node yield is required during pathological examination in MSI-H GC.
Authors: Teppei Morikawa; Noriko Tanaka; Aya Kuchiba; Katsuhiko Nosho; Mai Yamauchi; Jason L Hornick; Richard S Swanson; Andrew T Chan; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Curtis Huttenhower; Deborah Schrag; Charles S Fuchs; Shuji Ogino Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2012-08
Authors: Jaffer A Ajani; Thomas A D'Amico; Khaldoun Almhanna; David J Bentrem; Joseph Chao; Prajnan Das; Crystal S Denlinger; Paul Fanta; Farhood Farjah; Charles S Fuchs; Hans Gerdes; Michael Gibson; Robert E Glasgow; James A Hayman; Steven Hochwald; Wayne L Hofstetter; David H Ilson; Dawn Jaroszewski; Kimberly L Johung; Rajesh N Keswani; Lawrence R Kleinberg; W Michael Korn; Stephen Leong; Catherine Linn; A Craig Lockhart; Quan P Ly; Mary F Mulcahy; Mark B Orringer; Kyle A Perry; George A Poultsides; Walter J Scott; Vivian E Strong; Mary Kay Washington; Benny Weksler; Christopher G Willett; Cameron D Wright; Debra Zelman; Nicole McMillian; Hema Sundar Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Stefania Beghelli; Giovanni de Manzoni; Stefano Barbi; Anna Tomezzoli; Franco Roviello; Carmela Di Gregorio; Carla Vindigni; Laura Bortesi; Alice Parisi; Luca Saragoni; Aldo Scarpa; Patrick S Moore Journal: Surgery Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: E J Th Belt; E A te Velde; O Krijgsman; R P M Brosens; M Tijssen; H F van Essen; H B A C Stockmann; H Bril; B Carvalho; B Ylstra; H J Bonjer; G A Meijer Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-10-12 Impact factor: 5.344