Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention (아시아태평양암예방학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Validity and Necessity of Sub-classification of N3 in the 7th UICC TNM Stage of Gastric Cancer

  • Li, Fang-Xuan (Cancer Prevention Center, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy) ;
  • Zhang, Ru-Peng (Department of Gastric Cancer Surgery, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy) ;
  • Liang, Han (Department of Gastric Cancer Surgery, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy) ;
  • Quan, Ji-Chuan (Department of Gastric Cancer Surgery, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy) ;
  • Liu, Hui (Department of Gastric Cancer Surgery, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy) ;
  • Zhang, Hui (Department of Gastric Cancer Surgery, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy)
  • Published : 2013.03.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The $7^{th}$ TNM staging is the first authoritative standard for evaluation of effectiveness of treatment of gastric cancer worldwide. However, revision of pN classification within TNM needs to be discussed. In particular, the N3 sub-stage is becoming more conspicuous. Methods: Clinical data of 302 pN3M0 stage gastric cancer patients who received radical gastrectomy in Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from January 2001 to May 2006 were retrospectively analyzed. Results: Location of tumor, depth of invasion, extranodal metastasis, gastric resection, combined organs resection, lymph node metastasis, rate of lymph node metastasis, negative lymph nodes count were important prognostic factors of pN3M0 stage gastric cancers. TNM stage was also associated with prognosis. Patients at T2N3M0 stage had a better prognosis than other sub-classification. T3N3M0 and T4aN3aM0 patients had equal prognosis which followed the T2N3M0. T4aN3bM0 and T4bN3aM0 had lower survival rate than the formers. T4bN3bM0 had worst prognosis. In multivariate analysis, TNM stage group and rate of lymph node metastasis were independent prognostic factors. Conclusions: The sub-stage of N3 may be useful for more accurate prediction of prognosis; it should therefore be applied in the TNM stage system.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahn J R, Jung M, Kim C, et al (2009). Prognosis of pN3 stage gastric cancer. Cancer Res Treat, 41, 73-9. https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2009.41.2.73
  2. Aurello P, D'Angelo F, Rossi S, et al (2007). Classification of lymph node metastases from gastric cancer: comparison between N-site and N-number systems. Our experience and review of the literature. Am Surg, 73, 359-66.
  3. Chae S, Lee A, Lee J H (2011). The effectiveness of the new (7th) UICC N classification in the prognosis evaluation of gastric cancer patients: a comparative study between the 5th/6th and 7th UICC N classification. Gastric Cancer, 14, 166-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-011-0024-6
  4. Deng J, Liang H, Sun D, Wang D, Pan Y (2010). Suitability of 7th UICC N stage for predicting the overall survival of gastric cancer patients after curative resection in China. Ann Surg Oncol, 17, 1259-66. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-0939-x
  5. Deng J, Liang H, Wang D, et al (2010). Enhancement the prediction of postoperative survival in gastric cancer by combining the negative lymph node count with ratio between positive and examined lymph nodes. Ann Surg Oncol, 17, 1043-51. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0863-0
  6. Greene FL (2002). The American Joint Committee on Cancer: updating the strategies in cancer staging. Bull Am Coll Surg, 87, 13-5.
  7. Ichikura T, Tomimatsu S, Uefuji K, et al (1999). Evaluation of the New American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union against cancer classification of lymph node metastasis from gastric carcinoma in comparison with the Japanese classification. Cancer, 86, 553-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990815)86:4<553::AID-CNCR2>3.0.CO;2-D
  8. Ikeguchi M, Murakami D, Kanaji S, et al (2004). Lymph node metastasis of gastric cancer: comparison of Union International Contra Cancer and Japanese systems. Anz J Surg, 74, 852-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-1433.2004.03188.x
  9. Japanese GCA (1998). Japanese Classification of Gastric Carcinoma - 2nd English Edition -. Gastric Cancer, 1, 10-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00011681
  10. Jung H, Lee HH, Song KY, Jeon HM, Park CH (2011). Validation of the seventh edition of the american joint committee on cancer TNM staging system for gastric cancer. Cancer.
  11. Katai H, Sano T, Sasako M, Fukagawa T, Saka M (2004). Update on surgery of gastric cancer: new procedures versus standard technique. Dig Dis, 22, 338-44. https://doi.org/10.1159/000083596
  12. Kim CY, Yang DH (2009). Adjustment of N stages of gastric cancer by the ratio between the metastatic and examined lymph nodes. Ann Surg Oncol, 16, 1868-74. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0430-8
  13. Kim JJ, Song KY, Hur H, et al (2009). Lymph node micrometastasis in node negative early gastric cancer. Europ J Surg Oncol, 35, 409-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2008.05.004
  14. Klein KE, Hermans J, van Krieken JH, van de Velde CJ (2001). Evaluation of the 5th edition of the TNM classification for gastric cancer: improved prognostic value. Br J Cancer, 84, 64-71. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.2000.1548
  15. Kojima N, Yonemura Y, Bando E, et al (2008). Optimal extent of lymph node dissection for T1 gastric cancer, with special reference to the distribution of micrometastasis, and accuracy of preoperative diagnosis for wall invasion. Hepatogastroenterology, 55, 1112-7.
  16. Lemmens VE, Dassen AE, van der Wurff AA, Coebergh JW, Bosscha K (2011). Lymph node examination among patients with gastric cancer: variation between departments of pathology and prognostic impact of lymph node ratio. Europ J Surg Oncol, 37, 488-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2011.03.005
  17. Marchet A, Mocellin S, Ambrosi A, et al (2007). The ratio between metastatic and examined lymph nodes (N ratio) is an independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer regardless of the type of lymphadenectomy: results from an Italian multicentric study in 1853 patients. Ann Surg, 245, 543-52. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000250423.43436.e1
  18. Qiu MZ, Wang ZQ, Zhang DS, et al (2011). Comparison of 6th and 7th AJCC TNM staging classification for carcinoma of the stomach in China. Ann Surg Oncol, 18, 1869-76. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1542-x
  19. Saito H, Fukumoto Y, Osaki T, et al (2007). Prognostic significance of level and number of lymph node metastases in patients with gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol, 14, 1688-93. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-006-9314-3
  20. Saito H, Osaki T, Murakami D, et al (2007). Recurrence in early gastric cancer--presence of micrometastasis in lymph node of node negative early gastric cancer patient with recurrence. Hepatogastroenterology, 54, 620-4.
  21. Sobin LH (2001). TNM: principles, history, and relation to other prognostic factors. Cancer, 91, 1589-92. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20010415)91:8+<1589::AID-CNCR1170>3.0.CO;2-K
  22. Wang W, Sun XW, Li CF, et al (2011). Comparison of the 6th and 7th editions of the UICC TNM staging system for gastric cancer: results of a Chinese single-institution study of 1,503 patients. Ann Surg Oncol, 18, 1060-7. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1424-2
  23. Xu DZ (2010). The lymph node ratio staging system in gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol, 17, 659. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0793-x
  24. Yamashita K, Sakuramoto S, Kikuchi S, et al (2008). Validation of staging systems for gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer, 11, 111-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-008-0466-7

Cited by

  1. Aberrant Expression of the Autocrine Motility Factor Receptor Correlates with Poor Prognosis and Promotes Metastasis in Gastric Carcinoma vol.15, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.2.989
  2. Expression of C4.4A is a Potential Independent Prognostic Factor for Patients with Gastric Cancer vol.15, pp.9, 2014, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.9.3895
  3. Anatomic Extent of Metastatic Lymph Nodes: Still Important for Gastric Cancer Prognosis vol.21, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3403-x
  4. Risk Factors and Epidemiology of Gastric Cancer in Pakistan vol.16, pp.12, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.12.4821
  5. The IGCA staging system is more accurate than AJCC7 system in stratifying survival of patients with gastric cancer in stage III vol.17, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3235-3
  6. Early postoperative tumor marker responses provide a robust prognostic indicator for N3 stage gastric cancer vol.96, pp.32, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000007560
  7. Assessment of the 8th edition of TNM staging system for gastric cancer: the results from the SEER and a single-institution database pp.1744-8301, 2018, https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2018-0299
  8. Tumour deposits are a significant prognostic factor in gastric cancer - a systematic review and meta-analysis pp.03090167, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1111/his.13781