Non-curative gastrectomy for metastatic gastric cancer: rationale and long-term outcome in multicenter settings

Meta-analysis of the efficacy of applying reduced surgery for the treatment of asymptomatic unresectable advanced gastric cancer

OBJECTIVES

Systematic evaluation of the efficacy and safety of reduction surgery in asymptomatic unresectable advanced gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched from database inception to 12 July 2024. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate the quality and analyze the bias of the randomized controlled and non-randomized controlled studies included in this study, and RevMan (Version 5.4) was used to perform the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies were finally included, including 1 randomized controlled study and 4 retrospective studies. The cumulative sample size was 1717 cases, including 701 cases in the reduced surgery group and 1016 cases in the non-surgical treatment group. The results of the Meta-analysis showed that the reduced surgery group did not offer a survival benefit compared with the non-surgical treatment group in terms of 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates. The reduced surgery group had a longer median survival time than the non-surgical group by 11.58 months. The incidence rate, morbidity rate, and mortality rate of the reduced surgery group were 5.5% and 6.5% higher than those of the non-surgical group, respectively. The incidence of perioperative complications and death rate in the reduced surgery group were 15% and 4%, respectively; about 3% of patients might have complications of the primary foci during non-surgical treatment and need palliative surgical resection.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests that in asymptomatic patients with unresectable advanced gastric cancer, reduced surgery with resection of the primary site does not result in a long-term survival benefit. We look forward to more high-quality randomized controlled trials to provide more substantial evidence to support clinical practice.

A prognostic nomogram to predict the cancer-specific survival of patients with initially diagnosed metastatic gastric cancer: a validation study in a Chinese cohort

BACKGROUND

Few studies have been designed to predict the survival of Chinese patients initially diagnosed with metastatic gastric cancer (mGC). Therefore, the objective of this study was to construct and validate a new nomogram model to predict cancer-specific survival (CSS) in Chinese patients.

METHODS

We collected 328 patients with mGC from Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital as the training cohort and 60 patients from Xinyuan County People's Hospital as the external validation cohort. Multivariate Cox regression was used to identify risk factors, and a nomogram was created to predict CSS. The predictive performance of the nomogram was evaluated using the consistency index (C-index), the calibration curve, and the decision curve analysis (DCA) in the training cohort and the validation cohort.

RESULTS

Multivariate Cox regression identified differentiation grade (P < 0.001), T-stage (P < 0.05), N-stage (P < 0.001), surgery (P < 0.05), and chemotherapy (P < 0.001) as independent predictors of CSS. Nomogram of chemotherapy regimens and cycles was also designed by us for the prediction of mGC. Thus, these factors are integrated into the nomogram model: the C-index value was 0.72 (95% CI 0.70-0.85) for the nomogram model and 0.82 (95% CI 0.79-0.89) and 0.73 (95% CI 0.70-0.86) for the internal and external validation cohorts, respectively. Calibration curves and DCA also demonstrated adequate fit and ideal net benefit in prediction and clinical applications.

CONCLUSIONS

We established a practical nomogram to predict CSS in Chinese patients initially diagnosed with mGC. Nomograms can be used to individualize survival predictions and guide clinicians in making therapeutic decisions.

Are Palliative Interventions Worth the Risk in Advanced Gastric Cancer? A Systematic Review

Background: Less than 25% of gastric cancers (GC) are discovered early, leading to limited treatment options and poor outcomes (27.8% mortality, 3.7% 5-year survival). Screening programs have improved cure rates, yet post-diagnosis treatment guidelines remain unclear (systemic chemotherapy versus surgery). The optimal type of palliative surgery (palliative gastrectomy (PG), surgical bypass (SB), endoscopic stenting (ES)) for long-term outcomes is also debated. Methods: A literature review was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases along with Google Scholar with the search terms "gastric cancer" and "palliative surgery" for studies post-1985. From the initial 1018 articles, multiple screenings narrowed it to 92 articles meeting criteria such as "metastatic, stage IV GC", and intervention (surgery or chemotherapy). Data regarding survival and other long-term outcomes were recorded. Results: Overall, there was significant variation between studies but there were similarities of the conclusions reached. ES provided quick symptom relief, while PG showed improved overall survival (OS) only with adjuvant chemotherapy in a selective population. PG had higher mortality rates compared to SB, with ES having a reported 0% mortality, but OS improved with chemotherapy across both SB and PG. Conclusions: Less frail patients may experience an improvement in OS with palliative resection under limited circumstances. However, operative intervention without systemic chemotherapy is unlikely to demonstrate a survival benefit. Further research is needed to explore any correlations.

Palliative Surgery for Patients with Gastroesophageal Junction or Gastric Cancer: A Report on Clinical Observational Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Few studies have focused on palliative surgery in patients with advanced gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) or gastric cancer. We sought to evaluate clinical observational outcomes following palliative surgery in this population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with GEJ or gastric cancer who underwent palliative surgery (1/2010-11/2022) were identified. The primary outcomes were symptom improvement, ability to tolerate an oral diet, discharge to home, 30 "good days" without hospitalization, and receipt of systemic treatment. Postoperative outcomes and survival were secondarily evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 93 patients, the median age was 59 (IQR 47-68) years, and the median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) was 1 (range 0-3). The most frequent indication for palliative surgery was primary tumor obstruction [75 (81%) patients]. The most common procedures were feeding tube placement in 60 (65%) and intestinal bypass in 15 (16%) patients. A total of 75 (81%) patients experienced symptom improvement. Of these, 19 (25%) developed recurrent and 49 (65%) developed new symptoms. ECOG-PS was significantly associated with symptom-free time. Among those who underwent a bypass, resection, or ostomy creation for malignant obstruction, 16 (80%) tolerated an oral diet. Postoperatively, 87 (94%) were discharged home, 72 (77%) had 30 good days, and 64 (69%) received systemic treatment. Postoperative complications occurred in 35 (38%) patients, and 7 (8%) died within 30 days. The median survival time was 7.7 (95% CI 6.4-10.40) months.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with incurable GEJ or gastric cancer can benefit from palliative surgery. Prognosis and performance status should inform goals-of-care discussions and patient selection for surgical palliation.

PALLIATIVE GASTRECTOMY VERSUS GASTRIC BYPASS FOR SYMPTOMATIC CLINICAL STAGE IV GASTRIC CANCER: A PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING ANALYSIS

BACKGROUND

Patients with clinical stage IV gastric cancer may require palliative procedures to manage complications such as obstruction. However, there is no consensus on whether performing palliative gastrectomy compared to gastric bypass brings benefits in terms of survival.

AIMS

To compare the overall survival of patients with distal obstructive gastric cancer undergoing palliative surgical treatment, using propensity score matching analysis.

METHODS

Patients who underwent palliative bypass surgery (gastrojejunostomy or partitioning) and resection between the years 2009 and 2023 were retrospectively selected. Initial and postoperative clinicopathological variables were collected.

RESULTS

150 patients were initially included. The derived group (n=91) presented more locally invasive disease (p<0.01), greater degree of obstruction (p<0.01), and worse clinical status (p<0.01), while the resected ones (n= 59) presented more distant metastasis (p<0.01). After matching, 35 patients remained in each group. There was no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications, but the derived group had higher 90-day mortality (p<0.01). Overall survival was 16.9 and 4.5 months for the resected and derived groups, respectively (p<0.01). After multivariate analysis, hypoalbuminemia (hazard ratio - HR=2.02, 95% confidence interval - 95%CI 1.17-3.48; p=0.01), absence of adjuvant chemotherapy (HR=5.97; 95%CI 3.03-11.7; p<0.01), and gastric bypass (HR=3,28; 95%CI 1.8-5.95; p<0.01) were associated with worse survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative gastrectomy was associated with greater survival and lower postoperative morbidity compared to gastric bypass. This may be due to better local control of the disease, with lower risks of complications and better effectiveness of chemotherapy.

Who are optimal candidates for primary tumor resection in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma? A population-based study

BACKGROUND

The research aimed to construct a novel predictive nomogram to identify specific metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (mGAC) populations who could benefit from primary tumor resection (PTR).

METHOD

Patients with mGAC were included in the SEER database and divided into PTR and non-PTR groups. The Kaplan-Meier analysis, propensity score matching (PSM), least absolute shrink and selection operator (LASSO) regression, multivariable logistic regression, and multivariate Cox regression methods were then used. Finally, the prediction nomograms were built and tested.

RESULTS

3185 patients with mGAC were enrolled. Among the patients, 679 cases underwent PTR while the other 2506 patients didn't receive PTR. After PSM, the patients in the PTR group presented longer median overall survival (15.0 vs. 7.0 months, p < 0.001). Among the PTR group, 307 (72.9%) patients obtained longer overall survival than seven months (beneficial group). Then the LASSO logistic regression was performed, and gender, grade, T stage, N stage, pathology, and chemotherapy were included to construct the nomogram. In both the training and validation cohorts, the nomogram exhibited good discrimination (AUC: 0.761 and 0.753, respectively). Furthermore, the other nomogram was constructed to predict 3-, 6-, and 12-month cancer-specific survival based on the variables from the multivariate Cox analysis. The 3-, 6-, and 12-month AUC values were 0.794, 0.739, and 0.698 in the training cohort, and 0.805, 0.759, and 0.695 in the validation cohorts. The calibration curves demonstrated relatively good consistency between the predicted and observed probabilities of survival in two nomograms. The models' clinical utility was revealed through decision curve analysis.

CONCLUSION

The benefit nomogram could guide surgeons in decision-making and selecting optimal candidates for PTR among mGAC patients. And the prognostic nomogram presented great prediction ability for these patients.

Comparing treatment and outcomes in advanced esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, and gastric adenocarcinomas: a population-based study

Background:

Treatment of advanced or metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) follows the guidelines for gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEJC) and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC), but patients with EAC are often excluded from clinical studies of GEJC/GAC.

Objectives:

Here we describe treatment and survival of patients with advanced EAC, GEJC, and GAC to provide population-based evidence on distinctions and similarities between these populations.

Design:

Retrospective cohort study of patients with unresectable advanced (cT4b) or metastatic (cM1) EAC, GEJC, or GAC (2015–2020) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry.

Methods:

Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan–Meier methods, log-rank tests, and multivariable Cox regression.

Results:

In all, 7391 patients were included (EAC: n = 3346, GEJC: n = 1246, and GAC: n = 2798). Patients with EAC were more often males and more often had ⩾2 metastatic locations. First-line systemic therapy was received by 42%, 47%, and 36% of patients with EAC, GEJC, and GAC, respectively. Median OS was 5.0, 5.1, and 4.0 months for all patients with EAC, GEJC, and GAC, respectively (p < 0.001). Median OS from start of first-line therapy of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative adenocarcinomas was 7.6, 7.8, and 7.5 months (p = 0.12) and of patients with HER2-positive carcinoma receiving first-line trastuzumab-containing therapy was 11.0, 13.3, and 9.5 months (p = 0.37) in EAC, GEJC, and GAC, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, no difference in OS for patients with EAC, GEJC, and GAC was observed.

Conclusion:

Despite differences in clinical characteristics and treatment strategies, survival between patients with advanced EAC, GEJC, and GAC was similar. We advocate that EAC patients should not be excluded from clinical trials for patients with molecularly similar GEJC/GAC.

Survival benefit of surgical resection for stage IV gastric cancer: A SEER-based propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer (GC) is a major malignancy worldwide, and its incidence and mortality rate are increasing year by year. Clinical guidelines mainly use palliative drug combination therapy for stage IV gastric cancer. In accordance with some small sample studies, surgery can prolong survival. There is no uniform treatment plan for stage IV gastric cancer. This study focused on collecting evidence of the survival benefit of cancer-directed surgery (CDS) for patients with stage IV gastric cancer by analyzing data from a large sample.

METHODS

Data on patients with stage IV gastric cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 was extracted and divided into CDS and no-CDS groups using the large dataset in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. With bias between the two groups minimized by propensity score matching (PSM), the prognostic role of CDS was studied by the Cox proportional risk model and Kaplan-Meier.

RESULTS

A total of 6,284 patients with stage IV gastric cancer were included, including 514 patients with CDS who were matched with no-CDS patients according to propensity score (1:1), resulting in the inclusion of 432 patients each in the CDS and no-CDS groups. The results showed that CDS appeared to prolong the median survival time for stage IV gastric cancer (from 6 months to 10 months). Multifactorial analysis showed that poorly differentiated tumors (grades III-IV) significantly affected patient survival, and chemotherapy was a protective prognostic factor.

CONCLUSION

The findings support that CDS can provide a survival benefit for stage IV gastric cancer. However, a combination of age, underlying physical status, tumor histology, and metastatic status should be considered when making decisions about CDS, which will aid in clinical decision-making.

Outcomes After Surgical Palliation of Patients With Gastric Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Surgery is an option for symptom palliation in patients with metastatic gastric cancer. Operative outcomes after palliative interventions are largely unknown. Herein, we assess the trends of surgical palliation use for patients with gastric cancer and describe outcomes of patients undergoing surgical palliation compared to nonsurgical palliation.

METHODS

Patients with clinical Stage IV gastric cancer in the National Cancer Database (2004-2015) who received surgical or nonsurgical palliation were selected. We identified factors associated with palliative surgery. Survival differences were assessed by Kaplan-Meier estimate, Cox proportional hazard regression, and log rank test.

RESULTS

Six thousand eight hundred twenty nine patients received palliative care for gastric cancer. Most patients (87%, n = 5944) received nonsurgical palliation: 29% radiation therapy, 57% systemic treatment, and 14% pain management. The number of patients receiving palliative care increased between 2004 and 2015; however, use of surgical palliation declined significantly (22% in 2004, 8% in 2015; P < 0.001). Median overall survival (OS) for the cohort was 5.65 mo (95% confidence interval 5.45-5.85); 1-year and 2-year OS were 24% and 9%, respectively. Older age at diagnosis and diagnosis between 2004 and 2006 were significantly associated with undergoing surgical palliation. Patients who underwent surgical palliation had significantly shorter median OS and a 20% higher hazard of mortality than those who received nonsurgical palliation.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with metastatic gastric cancer experience very short survival. While palliative surgery is used infrequently, the observed association with shorter median OS underscores the importance of careful patient selection. Palliative surgery should be offered judiciously and expectations about outcomes clearly established.

Gastrectomy for stage IV gastric cancer: a comparison of different treatment strategies from the SEER database

In the West, more than one third of newly diagnosed subjects show metastatic disease in gastric cancer (mGC) with few care options available. Gastrectomy has recently become a subject of debate, with some evidence showing advantages in survival beyond the sole purpose of treatment tumor-related complications. We investigated the survival benefit of different strategies in mGC patients, focusing on the role and timing of gastrectomy. Data were extracted from the SEER database. Groups were determined according to whether patients received gastrectomy, chemotherapy, supportive care. Patients receiving a multimodality treatment were further divided according to timing of surgery, whether performed before (primary gastrectomy, PG) or after chemotherapy (secondary gastrectomy, SG). 16,596 patients were included. Median OS was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the SG (15 months) than in the PG (13 months), gastrectomy alone (6 months), and chemotherapy (7 months) groups. In the multivariate analysis, SG showed better OS (HR = 0.22, 95%CI = 0.18-0.26, p < 0.001) than PG (HR = 0.25, 95%CI = 0.23-0.28, p < 0.001), gastrectomy (HR = 0.40, 95%CI = 0.36-0.44, p < 0.001), and chemotherapy (HR = 0.42, 95%CI = 0.4-0.44, p < 0.001). The survival benefits persisted even after the PSM analysis. This study shows survival advantages of gastrectomy as multimodality strategy after chemotherapy. In selected patients, SG can be proposed to improve the management of stage IV disease.

Prognostic Value of the Site of Distant Metastasis and Surgical Interventions in Metastatic Gastric Cancer: A Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Studies on the prognostic significance of site-specific distant metastasis, multiple-site metastases, and the impact of surgery of the primary tumor and metastatic lesion on survival outcomes of patients with metastatic gastric cancer (GC) remain elusive. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the prognostic significance of the site of distant metastasis among patients with metastatic GC. Furthermore, the effect of surgery of the primary tumor and metastatic lesion on the prognosis of metastatic GC was also analyzed.

METHODS

The data of 4,221 eligible patients, who were diagnosed with metastatic GC between 2010 and 2015, were identified from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association between potential prognostic factors, including the site of metastasis and surgery, and survival of patients with metastatic GC. Overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival (CSS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier survival curves and differences were assessed using the Log-rank test.

RESULTS

Out of the total 4,221 GC patients with definite organ metastases, 3312 patients had single-site metastasis while 909 patients had multiple-site metastases. GC patients with single-site metastasis of liver or lung exhibited better CSS and OS compared to those with bone metastasis. Furthermore, GC patients with liver metastasis benefited from surgery of both the primary and metastatic lesions, while those with lung metastasis benefited from surgery of metastasis resection only. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that GC patients with single-site metastasis, well-differentiated tumors, GC patients who underwent surgery of the primary tumor and those who received chemotherapy exhibited favorable prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The site of metastasis was an independent prognostic factor for metastatic GC. Surgery had survival benefits in certain cases of metastatic GC; however, further studies are warranted to clarify these benefits in carefully selected patients.

The incidence, risk factors and predictive nomograms for early death among patients with stage IV gastric cancer: a population-based study

Background

Although advances in the treatment of stage IV gastric cancer (GC) patients, some patients were observed to die within 3 months of initial diagnosis. The present study aimed to explore the early mortality and risk factors for stage IV GC and further develop nomograms.

Methods

A total of 2,174 eligible stage IV GC patients were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Logistic regression analyses were used to determine the risk factors and develop the nomograms to predict all-cause early death and cancer-specific early death. The predictive performance of the nomograms was assessed by receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC), calibration plots and decision curve analyses (DCA) in both training and validation cohorts.

Results

Of 2,174 patients enrolled, 708 died within 3 months of initial diagnosis (n=668 for cancer-specific early death). Early mortality remained stable from 2010-2015. Non-Asian or Pacific Islander (API) race, poorer differentiation, middle sites of the stomach, no surgery, no radiotherapy, no chemotherapy, lung metastases and liver metastases were associated with high risk of both all-causes early death and cancer-specific early death. The nomograms constructed based on these factors showed favorable sensitivity, with the area under the ROC range of 0.816-0.847. The calibration curves and DCAs also exhibited adequate fit and ideal net benefit in prediction and clinical application.

Conclusions

Approximately one-third of stage IV GC patients experienced early death. These associated risk factors and predictive nomograms may help clinicians identify the patients at high risk of early death and be the reference for treatment choices.

Nomograms for predicting survival in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma who undergo palliative gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Recently, evidence has emerged that palliative gastrectomy in patients with stage IV gastric cancer may offer some survival benefits. However, the decision whether to perform primary tumor surgery remains challenging for surgeons, and investigations into models that are predictive of prognosis are scarce. Current study aimed to develop and validate prognostic nomograms for patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma treated with palliative gastrectomy.

METHODS

The development dataset comprised 1186 patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program who were diagnosed with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma in 2004-2011, while the validation dataset included 407 patients diagnosed in 2012-2015. Variables were incorporated into a Cox proportional hazards model to identify independent risk factors for survival. Both pre- and postoperative nomograms for predicting 1- or 2-year survival probabilities were constructed using the development dataset. The concordance index (c-index) and calibration curves were plotted to determine the accuracy of the nomogram models. Finally, the cut-off value of the calculated total scores based on preoperative nomograms was set and validated by comparing survival with contemporary cases without primary tumor surgery.

RESULTS

Age, tumor size, location, grade, T stage, N stage, metastatic site, scope of gastrectomy, number of examined lymph node(s), chemotherapy and radiotherapy were risk factors of survival and were included as variables in the postoperative nomogram; the c-indices of the development and validation datasets were 0.701 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.693-0.710) and 0.699 (95% CI: 0.682-0.716), respectively. The preoperative nomogram incorporated age, tumor size, location, grade, depth of invasion, regional lymph node(s) status, and metastatic site. The c-indices for the internal (bootstrap) and external validation sets were 0.629 (95% CI: 0.620-0.639) and 0.607 (95% CI: 0.588-0.626), respectively. Based on the preoperative nomogram, patients with preoperative total score > 28 showed no survival benefit with gastrectomy compared to no primary tumor surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survival nomograms for patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma undergoing palliative gastrectomy can assist surgeons in treatment decision-making and prognostication.

Palliative Gastrectomy and Survival in Patients With Metastatic Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of a Large Population-Based Study

OBJECTIVES

The role of palliative gastrectomy in the management of metastatic gastric cancer remains inadequately clarified.

METHODS

We analyzed patients with metastatic gastric cancer enrolled in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry from January 2004 to December 2012. Propensity score (PS) analysis with 1:1 matching and the nearest neighbor matching method was performed to ensure well-balanced characteristics of the groups of patients who undergone gastrectomy and those without gastrectomy. Data were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression models to evaluate the overall survival and cancer-specific survival rates with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

In general, receiving any kind of gastrectomy was associated with an improvement in survival in the multivariate analyses (hazard ratio [HR]os = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.59-0.70, HRcss = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.57-0.68) and PS matching (PSM) analyses (HRos = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.56-0.70, HRcss = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.55-0.70). After PSM, palliative gastrectomy was found to be associated with remarkably improved survival for patients with stage M1 with only 1 metastasis but not associated with survival of patients with stage M1 with extensive metastasis (≥2 metastatic sites).

DISCUSSION

The results obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database suggest that patients with metastatic gastric cancer might benefit from palliative gastrectomy on the basis of chemotherapy. However, a PSM cohort study of this kind still has a strong selection bias and cannot replace a properly conducted randomized controlled trial.

Outcomes of gastrectomy following upfront chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer patients with a single noncurable factor: a cohort study

Purpose

Chemotherapy is the standard care for patients with incurable advanced gastric cancer. Whether or when the addition of gastrectomy to chemotherapy improves survival of advanced gastric cancer patients with a single noncurable factor remains controversial. We aimed to evaluate the superiority of gastrectomy following chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone regarding overall survival (OS) in these patients.

Patients and methods

Patients with advanced gastric cancer from January 2008 to December 2014 were retrieved from our prospectively acquired database and retrospectively analyzed. The patients with a single noncurable factor were grouped in terms of cancer treatment: chemotherapy alone or gastrectomy following chemotherapy.

Results

Four hundred and fourteen patients (333 chemotherapy alone and 81 gastrectomy following chemotherapy) were included in this study. Kaplan–Meier survival curve showed a significant difference on median OS between chemotherapy-alone group and the gastrectomy plus chemotherapy group (10.9 vs 15.9 months, P<0.01). After propensity score analysis (n=126), chemotherapy plus surgery (81 patients) also showed survival benefit over chemotherapy alone (35 patients) (15.9 vs 10.0 months, P<0.01). Furthermore, stratified analyses indicated that patients with liver metastasis, <65 years of age, male, having normal level of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA199) upon diagnosis, or having nongastro-esophageal junction tumor benefited from surgery.

Conclusion

This study suggests that gastrectomy after chemotherapy could lead to survival benefit over chemotherapy alone in advanced gastric cancer patients with a single nonresectable factor if the disease was controllable by chemotherapy.

The Role of Surgical Resection for Stage IV Gastric Cancer With Synchronous Hepatic Metastasis

BACKGROUND

With improved responses to chemotherapy and targeted treatments, the role of surgery in metastatic gastric cancer (MGC) to the liver needs to be revisited. We sought to examine whether surgical resection is associated with improvement of long-term survival.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for MGC to the liver (2010-2014). Survival analysis was performed to compare the effect of gastrectomy and perioperative chemotherapy (G-CT) to palliative chemotherapy (PCT) alone.

RESULTS

We identified 3175 patients with MGC to the liver. Most patients (94%, n = 2979) were treated with PCT, whereas 6% (n = 196 patients) underwent G-CT. Overall survival improved in patients treated with G-CT compared to PCT alone (16 versus 9.7 mo, P < 0.001). In patients undergoing G-CT, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with increased overall survival compared to adjuvant chemotherapy (18.9 versus 14.8 mo, P = 0.011). Hazards of death significantly decreased with gastrectomy (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44-0.63, P < 0.001). Negative prognostic factors included advanced age (HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.06-1.14, P < 0.001), treatment at nonacademic institution (HR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.13-1.33, P < 0.001), and poorly differentiated grade (HR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.17-2.03, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

G-CT is associated with improved survival in patients with gastric cancer and synchronous liver metastasis. Further experience with well-designed prospective trials may be warranted to confirm these findings.

The Benefits of Resection for Gastric Carcinoma Patients with Non-curative Factors

The benefits of resection for gastric carcinoma patients with non-curative factors remain controversial. Thus, we evaluated the survival benefits of resection in these gastric carcinoma patients. We reviewed the hospital records of 467 gastric carcinoma patients with non-curative factors who had resection (n=305) and compared their clinicopathological findings with individuals (n=162) who underwent bypass or exploration from 1996 to 2010. The 3-year survival rate of patients who had resection was higher than was that of patients who did not (13.2 vs. 7.2%, respectively p<0.001). Cox's proportional hazard regression analysis revealed that only one factor was an independent, statistically significant prognostic parameter: the presence of peritoneal dissemination (risk ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.04–1.79; p<0.05). The 3-year survival rate of patients with peritoneal dissemination was higher in individuals who underwent resection compared with those who did not (9.5 vs. 4.7%, respectively; p<0.001). The current results highlight the improved survival rates of gastric carcinoma patients with non-curative factors who underwent surgery compared with those who did not. Although resection is not curative in this group of patients, we still recommend performing the procedure.

Staging and surgical approaches in gastric cancer: a clinical practice guideline

BACKGROUND

Resection is the cornerstone of cure for gastric adenocarcinoma; however, several aspects of surgical intervention remain controversial or are suboptimally applied at a population level, including staging, extent of lymphadenectomy (lnd), minimum number of lymph nodes that have to be assessed, gross resection margins, use of minimally invasive surgery, and relationship of surgical volumes with patient outcomes and resection in stage iv gastric cancer.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted in databases including medline (up to 10 June 2016), embase (up to week 24 of 2016), the Cochrane Library and various other practice guideline sites and guideline developer Web sites. A practice guideline was developed.

RESULTS

One guideline, seven systematic reviews, and forty-eight primary studies were included in the evidence base for this guidance document. Seven recommendations are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

All patients should be discussed at a multidisciplinary team meeting, and computed tomography (ct) imaging of chest and abdomen should always be performed when staging patients. Diagnostic laparoscopy is useful in the determination of M1 disease not visible on ct images. A D2 lnd is preferred for curative-intent resection of gastric cancer. At least 16 lymph nodes should be assessed for adequate staging of curative-resected gastric cancer. Gastric cancer surgery should aim to achieve an R0 resection margin. In the metastatic setting, surgery should be considered only for palliation of symptoms. Patients should be referred to higher-volume centres and those that have adequate support to manage potential complications. Laparoscopic resections should be performed to the same standards as those for open resections, by surgeons who are experienced in both advanced laparoscopic surgery and gastric cancer management.

Negative lymph node count is a significant prognostic factor in patient with stage IV gastric cancer after palliative gastrectomy

Negative lymph node (NLN) count has been validated as a protective predictor in various cancers after radical resection. However, the prognostic value of NLN count in the setting of stage IV gastric cancer patients who have received palliative resection has not been investigated. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER)-registered gastric cancer patients were used for analysis in this study. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and multivariate Cox proportional hazards model were used to assess the risk factors for patients’ survivals. The results showed that NLN count and N stage were independently prognostic factors in patients with stage IV gastric cancer after palliative surgery (P< 0.001). X-tile plots identified 2 and 11 as the optimal cutoff values to divide the patients into high, middle and low risk subsets in term of cause-specific survival (CSS). And NLN count was proved to be an independently prognostic factor in multivariate Cox analysis (P< 0.001). The risk score of NLN counts demonstrated that the plot of hazard ratios (HRs) for NLN counts sharply increased when the number of NLN counts decreased. Collectively, our present study revealed that NLN count was an independent prognostic predictor in stage IV gastric cancer after palliative resection. Standard lymph node dissection, such as D2 lymphadectomy maybe still necessary during palliative resection for patients with metastatic gastric cancer.

Surgical Considerations in the Management of Gastric Adenocarcinoma

Since Theodor Billroth and César Roux perfected the methods of postgastrectomy reconstruction in as early as the late nineteenth century, surgical management of gastric cancer has made incremental progress. The longstanding and contentious debate on the optimal extent of lymph node dissection for gastric cancer seems to have settled in favor of D2 dissection. Pylorus-preserving distal (central) gastrectomy has emerged as a less invasive, function-preserving option for T1N0 middle-third gastric cancers. Frozen section analysis of margins seems partially helpful in this direction. Last, the role of palliative gastrectomy in patients with metastatic seems less important than initially thought.

CA125 is a potential biomarker to predict surgically incurable gastric and cardia cancer: A retrospective study

Preoperative evaluation of the curability of gastric and cardia cancer is important to avoid risks of unnecessary surgery. Our previous study has reported several clinical parameters associated with incurable gastric surgery. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the correlation between CA125 and the curability of gastric and cardia cancer.A total of 297 cases of gastric and cardia cancer were analyzed retrospectively, including 153 cases with radical surgery and 144 with surgery for incurable gastric or cardia cancer. χ test was performed to analyze the associations between curability or incurable factors and clinicopathological data, including CA125 value. ROC curves were generated, and cutoff points for curability, T status, N status, peritoneal metastasis, and distant metastasis were found, respectively. Binary logistic regression was performed to verify the associations between dependent variables (curability, T status, N status, peritoneal metastasis, and distant metastasis) and covariates (related clinicopathological data from step 1 and cutoff points from step 2).Esophageal involvement, T grade, and CA125 were risk factors of curability. T grade and Borrmann type were risk factors of T status. T grade and CA125 were risk factors of N status. Age, esophageal involvement, T grade, and CA125 were risk factors of peritoneal metastasis. CA125 was risk factor of distant metastasis.CA125 is a potential biological marker for curability prediction of gastric and cardia cancer.

Palliative Gastrectomy Prolongs Survival of Metastatic Gastric Cancer Patients with Normal Preoperative CEA or CA19-9 Values: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background. Palliative gastrectomy has been suggested to improve survival of patients with metastatic gastric cancer, but limitations in study design and availability of robust prognostic factors have cast doubt on the overall merit of this procedure. Methods. The characteristics and clinical outcomes of 173 patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2012 were analyzed to determine the value of palliative gastrectomy and to identify potential prognostic factors. Results. Median overall patient survival was 6.5 months. To attenuate potential selection bias, patients with adequate performance and survival time of ≥ 2 months since diagnosis were included for risk factor analysis (n = 137). The median overall survival was longer for patients who were younger than 60 years, had better performance status (8.7 versus 6.4 months, P = 0.015), received systemic chemotherapy, or had palliative gastrectomy in univariate analyses. Gastrectomy (P = 0.002) remained statistically significant in multivariate analyses. Subgroup analysis showed that patients aged < 60 years, CEA < 5 ng/mL or CA19-9 < 35 U/mL, obtained a survival advantage from palliative gastrectomy. In fact, palliative gastrectomy doubled overall survival for patients who had normal CEA and/or normal CA19-9. Conclusions. Palliative gastrectomy prolongs the survival of metastatic gastric cancer patients with normal CEA and/or CA19-9 level at the time of diagnosis.

Quality of life: A critical outcome for all surgical treatments of gastric cancer

Surgery represents the main curative therapeutic modality for gastric cancer, and it is occasionally considered for palliation as well as prophylaxis. Most frequently, surgical outcomes are conveyed in terms of oncological outcomes such as recurrence and survival. However, quality of life (QoL) is also important and should be considered when making treatment decisions - including the extent of and approach to surgery. Measurement of QoL usually involves the application of questionnaires. While there are multiple QoL questionnaires validated for use in oncology patients, there are very few that have been validated for use in those with gastric cancer. In this review, we discuss and compare the current status of QoL questionnaires in gastric cancer. More importantly, the impact of surgery for treatment, palliation and prophylaxis of gastric cancer on QoL will be described. These data should inform the surgeon on the optimal approach to treating gastric cancer, taking into account oncological outcomes. Knowledge gaps are also identified, providing a roadmap for future studies.

The effect of the gastrectomy on survival in patients with metastatic gastric cancer: a study of ASMO

AIM

To investigate the role of surgical resection of primary tumor on overall survival (OS) in advanced gastric cancer patients at the time of diagnosis.

PATIENTS & METHODS

The survival rates of metastatic gastric cancer patients whose gastric primary tumor was resected at time of diagnosis were compared with metastatic gastric cancer patients whose primary tumor was nonresected.

RESULTS

The median progression-free survival and OS in operated and nonoperated group were 10 versus 6, 14 versus 9 months, respectively (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, gastric resection of primary tumor, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, second-line chemotherapy had a significant effect on OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.52 [95% CI: 0.38-0.71], HR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.42-0.78], HR: 1.48 [1.09-2.01]; p ≤ 0.001, p = 0.001 and p = 0.012, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Subpopulations of patients with metastatic gastric cancer might benefit from surgical removal of primary tumor.

Does surgery have a role in managing incurable gastric cancer?

Although the incidence of gastric cancer is decreasing, the outcomes of this disease are among the poorest of all solid-organ tumours, predominantly due to the frequent presence of stage IV metastatic disease at primary presentation. Stage IV gastric cancer is incurable and carries a very poor prognosis (5-year survival rate of ∼4%); palliative chemotherapy remains the standard of care, but increasing evidence indicates that palliative surgery can provide a prognostic and symptomatic benefit, particularly in combination with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. Ongoing prospective trials should further clarify the efficacy of palliative surgery in comparison with other treatment modalities. Until such data are available, surgery should not be offered as a standard first-line treatment, but can be considered in selected cases after thorough multidisciplinary discussions involving the patient. Patient selection for both gastrectomy and nonresectional surgery must include consideration of various factors that predict quality of life after surgery. This Perspectives summarizes the available evidence and discusses the utility of palliative surgery in relation to other therapeutic modalities in the management of incurable gastric cancer.

[Quality of life and visceral surgery]

Quality of life (QOL) is becoming more and more relevant in clinical research. An increasing number of publications each year confirmed this. The aim of this review is to summarize current data of QOL after surgical procedures. The results are represented by two examples each of malignant and benign diseases. The evaluation of QOL for patients with cancer is only possible with respect to the prognosis. Prospective randomized trials comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for early gastric cancer are only available from Asia. Data from the USA show that the QOL after gastrectomy was worse regardless of the surgical procedure. During the next 6 months the QOL improved but about one third of the patients had severe impairment during longer follow-up periods. Patients with R1 resection of pancreatic cancer showed only a slightly better prognosis but significantly better QOL compared to patients without resection. The results for the various procedures of cholecystectomy or hernia repair are not always consistent.

Identification of prognostic factors and surgical indications for metastatic gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The treatment of metastatic gastric cancer is not uniform, and the prognostic factors and indications for surgery are currently unclear. This retrospective study aimed to identify the prognostic factors and clinical indications for surgery in patients with metastatic gastric cancer.

METHODS

A total of 123 consecutive patients with gastric cancer and synchronous distant metastasis treated between January 1999 and December 2011 were reviewed. Patient, tumor, laboratory, surgical, and chemotherapy factors were analyzed, with overall survival as the endpoint. Univariate analyses were performed using the log-rank test, multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model, and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate survival. Significance was set at p<0.05.

RESULTS

The median overall survival time was 13.1 months. Ninety-eight patients received chemotherapy. Twenty-eight patients underwent gastrectomy with metastasectomy and 55 underwent gastrectomy without metastasectomy. The median overall survival time for patients who underwent gastrectomy with metastasectomy, gastrectomy without metastasectomy, and no surgical intervention was 21.9 months, 12.5 months, and 7.2 months, respectively (p<0.001). Multivariate analysis identified gastrectomy with or without metastasectomy, performance status (PS) ≥ 3, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) >3.1, and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) level >37 U/mL as predictors of poor survival. NLR and CA19-9 level were also independent prognostic factors in the group of patients who underwent surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

High pretreatment NLR, CA19-9 level, and PS are predictors of poor prognosis in patients with metastatic gastric cancer. In selected patients, gastrectomy can be performed safely, and may be associated with longer survival.

Assessment of advanced gastric cancer management in the United States

BACKGROUND

Increasing attention is being placed on utilization of treatment for advanced malignancies. Though some suggest it is futile, recent reports have advocated noncurative surgery for advanced gastric cancer. Our objectives were to (1) assess treatment trends, (2) identify predictors of surgery, and (3) evaluate the effect of treatment on outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with stage IV gastric adenocarcinoma were identified from the National Cancer Data Base (1998-2007). Patients who underwent emergent surgery were excluded. Models were developed to identify factors associated with treatment receipt and to compare adjusted overall survival by treatment group.

RESULTS

Twenty-four percent (n = 22,430) of patients presented with stage IV gastric adenocarcinoma; 1.5 % (n = 414) underwent emergent surgery. Of the remaining 21,039 patients, 62.4 % underwent treatment (87.0 % chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy (C ± RT), 5.6 % surgery, 7.2 % combined surgery and C ± RT). Over the decade, surgery rates increased by 43 %, and C ± RT use increased by 16 % while receipt of no treatment decreased by 26 % (all p < 0.001). Patients who were younger, white, and insured, as well as those with distal tumors were more likely to undergo surgery. Reasons for receiving no treatment were multifactorial but were most strongly associated with advanced age and being uninsured. Median survival was longest for patients selected to undergo surgery and C ± RT (13.5 months) versus C ± RT alone (6.1 months), surgery alone (4.8 months), or no treatment (1.7 months, all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of nonemergent surgical treatment and C ± RT for metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma has increased considerably over time, especially in certain patient populations; however, the true utility and cost of these treatments remain unknown.