Wen-Wu Qiu1, Qi-Yue Chen1, Wen-Ze Zheng2, Qi-Chen He1, Ze-Ning Huang1, Jian-Wei Xie1, Jia-Bin Wang1, Jian-Xian Lin1, Jun Lu1, Long-Long Cao1, Mi Lin1, Ru-Hong Tu1, Ju-Li Lin1, Hua-Long Zheng1, Guang-Tan Lin1, Guo-Sheng Lin1, Chao-Hui Zheng3, Chang-Ming Huang4, Ping Li5. 1. Department of Gastric Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China; Department of General Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education of Gastrointestinal Cancer,Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China; Fujian Key Laboratory of Tumor Microbiology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China. 2. Department of Gastric Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China; Department of General Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China. 3. Department of Gastric Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China; Department of General Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education of Gastrointestinal Cancer,Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China; Fujian Key Laboratory of Tumor Microbiology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China. Electronic address: wwkzch@163.com. 4. Department of Gastric Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China; Department of General Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education of Gastrointestinal Cancer,Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China; Fujian Key Laboratory of Tumor Microbiology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China. Electronic address: hcmlr2002@163.com. 5. Department of Gastric Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China; Department of General Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education of Gastrointestinal Cancer,Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China; Fujian Key Laboratory of Tumor Microbiology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China. Electronic address: pingli811002@163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have reported the association between the pattern and time point of recurrence in different groups stratified by age in postoperative survival of patients with gastric cancer. METHODS: The clinicopathological data and recurrence data of 2028 patients with GC who underwent curative surgery from January 2010 to March 2015 were enrolled in this study. Patients were grouped according to age: young group (YG) (≤45 years old) (n = 180) and non-young group (OG) (>45 years old) (n = 1848). RESULTS: A total of 2028 patients were enrolled. The young group had better 5-year OS and DFS than the non-young group. In peritoneal recurrence, the cumulative incidence of recurrence in YG was higher than that in OG (P < 0.001). In distant recurrence, the cumulative incidence of recurrence YG was always lower than that of OG (P = 0.004). Recurrence hazard function varied over time between the two groups:in the peritoneal metastasis, the recurrence hazard for YG was higher and earlier than that of OG and the YG was observed during five years after surgery with two recurrence peaks in 8.5 months and in 41.5 months. In distant recurrence, the recurrence hazard for OG had an earlier and higher single peak than that of YG (6.0 months). CONCLUSION: The recurrence characteristics of patients with gastric cancer after curative resection between young group and older group are different. Personalized follow-up strategies should be developed according to the age and time point after operation for the early detection of recurrence and making decision for further treatment.
BACKGROUND: Few studies have reported the association between the pattern and time point of recurrence in different groups stratified by age in postoperative survival of patients with gastric cancer. METHODS: The clinicopathological data and recurrence data of 2028 patients with GC who underwent curative surgery from January 2010 to March 2015 were enrolled in this study. Patients were grouped according to age: young group (YG) (≤45 years old) (n = 180) and non-young group (OG) (>45 years old) (n = 1848). RESULTS: A total of 2028 patients were enrolled. The young group had better 5-year OS and DFS than the non-young group. In peritoneal recurrence, the cumulative incidence of recurrence in YG was higher than that in OG (P < 0.001). In distant recurrence, the cumulative incidence of recurrence YG was always lower than that of OG (P = 0.004). Recurrence hazard function varied over time between the two groups:in the peritoneal metastasis, the recurrence hazard for YG was higher and earlier than that of OG and the YG was observed during five years after surgery with two recurrence peaks in 8.5 months and in 41.5 months. In distant recurrence, the recurrence hazard for OG had an earlier and higher single peak than that of YG (6.0 months). CONCLUSION: The recurrence characteristics of patients with gastric cancer after curative resection between young group and older group are different. Personalized follow-up strategies should be developed according to the age and time point after operation for the early detection of recurrence and making decision for further treatment.
Authors: Hyein Ahn; Geum Jong Song; Si-Hyong Jang; Myoung Won Son; Hyun Ju Lee; Moon-Soo Lee; Ji-Hye Lee; Mee-Hye Oh; Geum Cheol Jeong; Jong Hyuk Yun; Sang Mi Lee; Jeong Won Lee Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-10-09 Impact factor: 6.208