Yusuke Muneoka1,2, Manabu Ohashi3, Naoki Ishizuka4, Masaru Hayami1, Rie Makuuchi1, Satoshi Ida1, Koshi Kumagai1, Takeshi Sano1, Souya Nunobe1. 1. Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan. 2. Division of Digestive and General Surgery, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Japan. 3. Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan. manabu.ohashi@jfcr.or.jp. 4. Department of Clinical Trial Planning and Management, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The situation of positive resection margins (PRMs) varies notably between Western and Asian countries. In the West, PRMs are associated with advanced disease and R1, whereas in Asia, PRMs are also considered in early disease because stomach preservation was recently prioritized. Furthermore, PRMs are usually resected to obtain R0. However, the oncological impact of PRMs and additional resection remains unclear. The aim of this study is to evaluate the oncological impact of PRMs in laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for clinical stage (cStage) I gastric cancer. METHODS: A total of 2121 patients who underwent LG for cStage I gastric cancer between 2007 and 2015 were enrolled. Survival outcomes were compared between patients with PRMs (group P) and those without (group N). Furthermore, prognostic factors were analyzed using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (1.3%) had PRMs. Patients in group P had upper and more advanced disease, and the 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate was worse in group P compared with group N (76.3% vs. 95.1%, P = 0.003). The 5-year RFS of patients with pT2 or deeper (pT2-4) disease in group P was significantly worse than that of patients in group N (66.7% vs. 89.5%, P = 0.030) although that of patients with pT1 was not. Likelihood ratio tests showed that there was a significant interaction between pT status and PRM (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: PRM in cStage I gastric cancer is associated with advanced upper disease. It remains an independent prognostic factor in pT2-4 disease even after an additional resection to obtain R0.
BACKGROUND: The situation of positive resection margins (PRMs) varies notably between Western and Asian countries. In the West, PRMs are associated with advanced disease and R1, whereas in Asia, PRMs are also considered in early disease because stomach preservation was recently prioritized. Furthermore, PRMs are usually resected to obtain R0. However, the oncological impact of PRMs and additional resection remains unclear. The aim of this study is to evaluate the oncological impact of PRMs in laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for clinical stage (cStage) I gastric cancer. METHODS: A total of 2121 patients who underwent LG for cStage I gastric cancer between 2007 and 2015 were enrolled. Survival outcomes were compared between patients with PRMs (group P) and those without (group N). Furthermore, prognostic factors were analyzed using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (1.3%) had PRMs. Patients in group P had upper and more advanced disease, and the 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate was worse in group P compared with group N (76.3% vs. 95.1%, P = 0.003). The 5-year RFS of patients with pT2 or deeper (pT2-4) disease in group P was significantly worse than that of patients in group N (66.7% vs. 89.5%, P = 0.030) although that of patients with pT1 was not. Likelihood ratio tests showed that there was a significant interaction between pT status and PRM (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: PRM in cStage I gastric cancer is associated with advanced upper disease. It remains an independent prognostic factor in pT2-4 disease even after an additional resection to obtain R0.
Authors: Paolo Aurello; Paolo Magistri; Giuseppe Nigri; Niccolò Petrucciani; Luciano Novi; Laura Antolino; Francesco D'Angelo; Giovanni Ramacciato Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 2.480