Limits...
Prognostic Value of Metastatic No.8p LNs in Patients with Gastric Cancer.

Guo DJ, Yang K, Zhang WH, Chen XL, Chen XZ, Zhang B, Zhou ZG, Hu JK - Gastroenterol Res Pract (2015)

Bottom Line: Out of 284 patients, metastatic No.8p LNs were found in 24 (8.5%) patients.No significant difference of cumulative survival rates existed between the No.8p-positive group and No.8p-negative stage IV group (26% versus 28%, P = 0.923).Conclusions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.

ABSTRACT
Background. To evaluate prognostic value of metastatic No.8p LNs in patients with gastric cancer. Methods. From August 2002 to December 2011, a total of 284 gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy with No.8p LNs dissection were analyzed retrospectively in this study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the status of No.8p LNs. Clinicopathological features were collected to conduct the correlation analysis. Follow-up was carried out up to December 31st, 2014. Overall survival was analyzed. Results. Out of 284 patients, metastatic No.8p LNs were found in 24 (8.5%) patients. Compared with other 260 cases, these patients suffered morphologically larger tumor (P = 0.003), node stage (P = 0.000), and metastatic stage (P = 0.000). The 3-year overall survival rate was 26% in No.8p-positive group and 53% in No.8p-negative group. No significant difference of cumulative survival rates existed between the No.8p-positive group and No.8p-negative stage IV group (26% versus 28%, P = 0.923). Patients with other distant metastasis or not in No.8p+ group had similar cumulative survival rates (24% versus 28%, P = 0.914). Conclusions. Positive No.8p LNs were a poor but not an independent prognostic factor for patients with GC and should be recognized as distant metastasis.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Cumulative survival rates categorized by distant metastasis in No.8p-positive group, P = 0.914, No.8p-positive group without other M1 versus No.8p-positive group with other M1. log rank test. pTNM stage is based on the Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4663321&req=5

fig2: Cumulative survival rates categorized by distant metastasis in No.8p-positive group, P = 0.914, No.8p-positive group without other M1 versus No.8p-positive group with other M1. log rank test. pTNM stage is based on the Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition.

Mentions: Overall 3-year survival rate was 26.0% in No.8p+ group and 53.0% in No.8p− group (P = 0.005). We mainly explored the comparison of survival outcomes in No.8p− group at stage III/IV, because patients at stage I/II in No.8p− group did not reach their median survival time until the latest follow-up (Table 4). Significant difference of 3-year overall survival rates of the two groups existed in the items of gender, age gastrectomy, pathological degree, and curative degree (P < 0.050). Univariate analysis revealed that R1/R2 (P = 0.000), subtotal gastrectomy (P = 0.007), advanced T stage (P < 0.050), distant metastasis (P = 0.000), and positive No.8p LNs (P = 0.000) brought about higher risks of worse overall survival in GC patients, while multivariate analysis also illustrated R1/R2, T4 stage and N3b stage could run higher risks of worse overall survival in GC patients (P < 0.050) (Table 5). Moreover, the cumulative survival rate of No.8p− group in stage IV showed no statistical difference from that of No.8p+ group (P = 0.923). The cumulative survival rates of No.8p− group in stage I/II/III presented statistical difference from that of No.8p+ group (P < 0.050) (Figure 1). Patients in the No.8p+ group showed no statistical difference of cumulative survival rates, whether they had other extraregional lymph nodes or not (P = 0.914) (Figure 2).


Prognostic Value of Metastatic No.8p LNs in Patients with Gastric Cancer.

Guo DJ, Yang K, Zhang WH, Chen XL, Chen XZ, Zhang B, Zhou ZG, Hu JK - Gastroenterol Res Pract (2015)

Cumulative survival rates categorized by distant metastasis in No.8p-positive group, P = 0.914, No.8p-positive group without other M1 versus No.8p-positive group with other M1. log rank test. pTNM stage is based on the Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4663321&req=5

fig2: Cumulative survival rates categorized by distant metastasis in No.8p-positive group, P = 0.914, No.8p-positive group without other M1 versus No.8p-positive group with other M1. log rank test. pTNM stage is based on the Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition.
Mentions: Overall 3-year survival rate was 26.0% in No.8p+ group and 53.0% in No.8p− group (P = 0.005). We mainly explored the comparison of survival outcomes in No.8p− group at stage III/IV, because patients at stage I/II in No.8p− group did not reach their median survival time until the latest follow-up (Table 4). Significant difference of 3-year overall survival rates of the two groups existed in the items of gender, age gastrectomy, pathological degree, and curative degree (P < 0.050). Univariate analysis revealed that R1/R2 (P = 0.000), subtotal gastrectomy (P = 0.007), advanced T stage (P < 0.050), distant metastasis (P = 0.000), and positive No.8p LNs (P = 0.000) brought about higher risks of worse overall survival in GC patients, while multivariate analysis also illustrated R1/R2, T4 stage and N3b stage could run higher risks of worse overall survival in GC patients (P < 0.050) (Table 5). Moreover, the cumulative survival rate of No.8p− group in stage IV showed no statistical difference from that of No.8p+ group (P = 0.923). The cumulative survival rates of No.8p− group in stage I/II/III presented statistical difference from that of No.8p+ group (P < 0.050) (Figure 1). Patients in the No.8p+ group showed no statistical difference of cumulative survival rates, whether they had other extraregional lymph nodes or not (P = 0.914) (Figure 2).

Bottom Line: Out of 284 patients, metastatic No.8p LNs were found in 24 (8.5%) patients.No significant difference of cumulative survival rates existed between the No.8p-positive group and No.8p-negative stage IV group (26% versus 28%, P = 0.923).Conclusions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.

ABSTRACT
Background. To evaluate prognostic value of metastatic No.8p LNs in patients with gastric cancer. Methods. From August 2002 to December 2011, a total of 284 gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy with No.8p LNs dissection were analyzed retrospectively in this study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the status of No.8p LNs. Clinicopathological features were collected to conduct the correlation analysis. Follow-up was carried out up to December 31st, 2014. Overall survival was analyzed. Results. Out of 284 patients, metastatic No.8p LNs were found in 24 (8.5%) patients. Compared with other 260 cases, these patients suffered morphologically larger tumor (P = 0.003), node stage (P = 0.000), and metastatic stage (P = 0.000). The 3-year overall survival rate was 26% in No.8p-positive group and 53% in No.8p-negative group. No significant difference of cumulative survival rates existed between the No.8p-positive group and No.8p-negative stage IV group (26% versus 28%, P = 0.923). Patients with other distant metastasis or not in No.8p+ group had similar cumulative survival rates (24% versus 28%, P = 0.914). Conclusions. Positive No.8p LNs were a poor but not an independent prognostic factor for patients with GC and should be recognized as distant metastasis.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus