Management of gastric cancer in Ontario

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.

Appraisal of surgical outcomes and oncological efficiency of intraoperative adverse events in robotic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgical quality control is a crucial determinant of evaluating the tumor efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the ClassIntra grade for quality control and oncological outcomes of robotic radical surgery for gastric cancer (GC).

METHODS

Data of patients undergoing robotic radical surgery for GC at a high-volume center were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were categorized into two groups, the intraoperative adverse event (iAE) group and the non-iAE group, based on the occurrence of intraoperative adverse events. The iAEs were further classified into five sublevels (ranging from I to V according to severity) based on the ClassIntra grade. Surgical performance was assessed using the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (OSATS) and the General Error Reporting Tool.

RESULTS

This study included 366 patients (iAE group: n = 72 [19.7%] and non-iAE group: n = 294 [80.3%]). The proportion of ClassIntra grade II patients was the highest in the iAE group (54.2%). In total and distal gastrectomies, iAEs occurred most frequently in the suprapancreatic area (50.0% and 54.8%, respectively). In total gastrectomy, grade IV iAEs were most common during lymph node dissection in the splenic hilum area (once for bleeding [grade IV] and once for injury [grade IV]). The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival of the non-iAE group were significantly better than those of the iAE group (Log rank P < 0.001). Uni- and multi-variate analyses showed that iAEs were key prognostic indicators, independent of tumor stage and adjuvant chemotherapy (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

iAEs in patients who underwent robotic radical gastrectomy significantly correlated with the occurrence of postoperative complications and a poor long-term prognosis. Therefore, utilization and inclusion of ClassIntra grading as a crucial surgical quality control and prognostic indicator in the routine surgical quality evaluation system are recommended.

Predictive Value of KLASS-02-QC Assessment Score on KLASS-02 Surgical Outcomes: Validation of Surgeon Quality Control and Standardization for D2 Lymphadenectomy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to audit the 22 items and assessed each item's predictive value on surgical outcomes.

BACKGROUND

The KLASS-02 trial revealed that the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy are not inferior to open distal gastrectomy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. The surgeons participating in this trial were chosen based on the assessment scores from the KLASS-02-QC trial, which used 22 items for standardization of D2 lymphadenectomy and quality control.

METHODS

We reviewed proficiency scores (PSs) for 22 items for 20 surgeons who participated in KLASS-02. The surgeons were divided into 2 groups according to PS, and the perioperative outcomes of 924 patients enrolled in KLASS-02 were compared between groups. Each item's predictive value for perioperative outcome was then assessed using multivariable regression models.

RESULTS

Of the total 924 patients, 529 were operated on by high-score surgeons (high PS) and 395 were operated on by low-score surgeons (low-PS). High-PS group had less intraoperative blood loss, longer operation times, and fewer complications, major complications, reoperations, and shorter first flatus and hospital stay than low-PS group ( P =0.006, P <0.001, P <0.001, P <0.001, P =0.042, P =0.013, and P <0.001, respectively). Some items used in KLASS-02-QC predicted perioperative outcomes, such as intraoperative blood loss, major complications, reoperation, and hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this study only analyzed data associated with qualified surgeons, the 22 items effectively assessed the surgeons based on PS. A high score was associated with longer operation times, but better perioperative outcomes.

Endoscopic Ultrasound Predicts Risk of Occult Intra-Abdominal Metastases in Localized Gastric Cancer: A Validation Study

Background

In gastric cancer (GC) patients without imaging evidence of distant metastasis, diagnostic staging laparoscopy (DSL) is recommended to detect radiographically occult peritoneal metastasis (M1). DSL carries a risk for morbidity and its cost-effectiveness is unclear. Use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to improve patient selection for DSL has been proposed but not validated. We aimed to validate an EUS-based risk classification system predicting risk for M1 disease.

Methods

We retrospectively identified all GC patients without positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) evidence of distant metastasis who underwent staging EUS followed by DSL between 2010 and 2020. T1-2, N0 disease was EUS "low-risk"; T3-4 and/or N+ disease was "high-risk".

Results

A total of 68 patients met inclusion criteria. DSL identified radiographically occult M1 disease in 17 patients (25%). Most patients had EUS T3 tumors (n = 59, 87%) and 48 (71%) patients were node-positive (N+). Five (7%) patients were classified EUS "low-risk" and 63 (93%) were classified "high-risk". Of 63 "high-risk" patients, 17 (27%) had M1 disease. The ability of "low-risk" EUS to predict M0 disease at laparoscopy was 100% and DSL would have been avoided in five patients (7%). This stratification algorithm showed a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval (CI): 80.5-100%) and a specificity of 9.8% (95% CI: 3.3-21.4%).

Conclusions

Use of an EUS-based risk classification system in GC patients without imaging evidence of metastasis helps identify a subset of patients at low-risk for laparoscopic M1 disease who may avoid DSL and proceed directly to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or resection with curative intent. Larger, prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.

Intraoperative frozen section analysis of margin status as a quality indicator in gastric cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Positive pathologic margins following gastric cancer (GC) resection carries a poor prognosis. We evaluated intraoperative frozen section (IFS) analysis of resection margins (RMs) as a quality indicator in GC surgery.

METHODS

Patients referred to a provincial cancer agency with surgically resected non-metastatic GC between 2004 and 2012 were included. Associations between IFS analysis, other baseline characteristics, RMs, and overall survival (OS) were assessed using logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier analyses, and Cox proportional hazards modeling.

RESULTS

Among 377 patients, median age was 67 years, 68% were male, and 16% had +RMs. Thirty-four percent of patients underwent IFS analysis, which protected against +RMs (odds ratio [OR]: 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.16-0.73, p = 0.006) and improved OS (hazards ratio [HR]: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.54-0.98, p = 0.037). OS following re-resection of IFS positive patients was similar to IFS negative patients (69 vs. 54 months, p = 0.317). Stage III disease (OR: 12.8, 95% CI: 3.00-55.0, p = 0.001) and gastroesophageal junction tumors (OR: 2.25, 95% CI: 1.05-4.78, p = 0.036) predicted +RMs. Stage III disease led to worse OS (HR: 2.89, 95% CI: 1.92-4.34, p < 0.001) while intestinal histology improved OS (HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.50-0.90, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

IFS analysis reduce +RMs and improve OS and should be incorporated in curative intent GC surgery for patients with locally advanced GC.

Surgeon Quality Control and Standardization of D2 Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Prospective Multicenter Observational Study (KLASS-02-QC)

OBJECTIVE

To qualify surgeons to participate in a randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and open distal D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

No studies have sought to qualify surgeons for a randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and open D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter prospective observational study evaluating unedited videos of laparoscopic and open D2 gastrectomy performed by 27 surgeons. Surgeons performed 3 of each laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomies with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer. Five peers reviewed each unedited video using a video assessment form. Based on experts' review of videos, a separate review committee decided surgeons as "Qualified" or "Not-qualified."

RESULTS

Twelve surgeons (44.4%) were qualified on initial evaluation whereas the other 15 surgeons were not. Another 9 surgeons were finally qualified after re-evaluation. The median score for Qualified was significantly higher than Not-qualified (P < 0.001).Significant differences between Qualified and Not-qualified were noted both in operation type and in all evaluation area of surgical skill, perigastric, and extra-perigastric lymphadenectomy, although the inter-rater variability of the assessment score was low (kappa = 0.285). However, Not-qualified surgeons' scores improved upon re-evaluation of resubmitted videos.When compared laparoscopy with open surgery, median scores were similar between the 2 groups (P = 0.680). However, open gastrectomy scores for surgical skills were significantly higher than for laparoscopic surgery (P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Our surgeon quality control study for gastrectomy represents a milestone in surgical standardization for surgical clinical trials. Our methods could also serve as a system for educating surgeons and assessing surgical proficiency.

Cullin-RING Ligases as Promising Targets for Gastric Carcinoma Treatment

Gastric carcinoma has serious morbidity and mortality, which seriously threats human health. The studies on gastrointestinal cell biology have shown that the ubiquitination modification that occurs after protein translation plays an essential role in the pathogenesis of gastric carcinoma. Protein ubiquitination is catalyzed by E3 ubiquitin ligase and can regulate various substrate proteins in different cellular pathways. Cullin-RING E3 ligase (CRLs) is a representative of the E3 ubiquitin ligase family, which requires cullin (CUL) neddylation modification for activation to regulate homeostasis of ~20% of cellular proteins. The substrate molecules regulated by CRLs are often involved in many cell progressions such as cell cycle progression, cell apoptosis, DNA damage and repair. Given that CRLs play an important role in modulation of biological activities, so targeting a certain CULs member neddylation may be an attractive strategy for selectively controlling the cellular proteins levels to achieve the goal of cancer treatment. In this review, we will discuss the roles of CULs and Ring protein in gastric carcinoma and summarize the current neddylation modulators for gastric carcinoma treatment.

Population Registry of Esophageal and Stomach Tumours in Ontario (PRESTO): protocol for a multicentre clinical and pathological database including 25 000 patients

INTRODUCTION

Oesophagogastric cancers carry a high mortality, economic burden and rising incidence. There is a need to monitor and improve care for this disease. Pathologic information is a cornerstone of cancer diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. Few population-based studies combine pathology information and clinical outcomes. The objective of this study is to develop a clinical and pathological database of oesophagogastric cancers to study practice patterns, resource utilisation and clinical outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Population Registry of Esophageal and Stomach Tumours in Ontario (PRESTO) will include all patients with oesophagogastric cancer diagnosed from 2002 onwards within the province of Ontario. We estimate that the sample over the first 14 years of the study will include 26 000 patients. Pathologic information from diagnostic procedures, endomucosal resection specimens and surgical resection specimens is being abstracted into a purpose-built database. Pathology information will be linked to administrative data, which capture baseline demographics, patient-reported symptoms, physician billings, hospital visits, hospital characteristics, geography and vital statistics. The registry will be updated prospectively.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval for this study was obtained from the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre Research Ethics Board. The PRESTO database will enable the study of oesophagogastric cancer in Ontario under six themes of inquiry: treatment, surgical outcomes, pathology, survival, health system and resource utilisation and cost. This information will be a valuable addition to the global efforts to understand ways to optimise care for these diseases.

Gastric Cancer Staging: Is It Time for Magnetic Resonance Imaging?

Gastric cancer (GC) is a common cancer worldwide. Its incidence and mortality vary depending on geographic area, with the highest rates in Asian countries, particularly in China, Japan, and South Korea. Accurate imaging staging has become crucial for the application of various treatment strategies, especially for curative treatments in early stages. Unfortunately, most GCs are still diagnosed at an advanced stage, with the peritoneum (61-80%), distant lymph nodes (44-50%), and liver (26-38%) as the most common metastatic locations. Metastatic disease is limited to the peritoneum in 58% of cases; in nonperitoneal distant metastases, the most involved GC metastasization site is the liver (82%). The eighth edition of the tumor-node-metastasis staging system is the most commonly used system for determining GC prognosis. Endoscopic ultrasonography, computed tomography, and 18-fluorideoxyglucose positron emission tomography are historically the most accurate imaging techniques for GC staging. However, studies have recently shown renewed interest in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a useful tool in GC staging, especially for distant metastasis assessment. The technical improvement of diffusion-weighted imaging and the increasing use of hepatobiliary contrast agents have been shown to increase the diagnostic performance of MRI, particularly for detecting peritoneal and liver metastasis. However, no principal oncological guidelines have included the use of MRI as a first-line technique for distant metastasis evaluation during the GC staging process, such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines. This review analyzed the role of the principal imaging techniques in GC diagnosis and staging, focusing on the potential role of MRI, especially for assessing peritoneal and liver metastases.

Stage IV Gastric Cancer: The Surgical Perspective of the Italian Research Group on Gastric Cancer

Background/Aim: This work explored the prognostic role of curative versus non-curative surgery, the prognostic value of the various localizations of metastatic disease, and the possibility of identifying patients to be submitted to aggressive therapies. Patients and Methods: Retrospective chart review of stage IV patients operated on in our institutions. Results: Two hundred and eighty-two patients were considered; 73.4% had a single metastatic presentation. In 117 cases, a curative (R0) resection of primary and metastases was possible; 75 received a R1 resection and 90 a palliative R2 gastrectomy. Surgery was integrated with chemotherapy in multiple forms: conversion therapy, HIPEC, neo-adjuvant and adjuvant treatment. Median overall survival (OS) of the entire cohort was 10.9 months, with 14 months for the R0 subgroup. There was no correlation between metastasis site and survival. At multivariate analysis, several variables associated with the lymphatic sphere showed prognostic value, as well as tumor histology and the curativity of the surgical procedure, with a worse prognosis associated with a low number of resected nodes, D1 lymphectomy, pN3, non-intestinal histology, and R+ surgery. Considering the subgroup of R0 patients, the variables pT, pN and D displayed an independent prognostic role with a cumulative effect, showing that patients with no more than 1 risk factor can reach a median survival of 33 months. Conclusions: Our data show that the possibility of effective care also exists for Western patients with stage IV gastric cancer.

Is it safe to perform gastrectomy in gastric cancer patients aged 80 or older?: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Few studies have focused on octogenarian patients with gastric cancer (GC) who have undergone gastrectomy. This meta-analysis of published studies was performed to assess the safety of treating octogenarian GC patients with surgery.

METHODS

Databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched until January 2019. The incidence of preoperative comorbidities, postoperative complications, and mortality was assessed using odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Further, the hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were applied for survival outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 18,179 patients with GC in 21 studies were included. Our results demonstrated that octogenarian patients were associated with a higher burden of comorbidities (OR = 2.79; 95% CI: 2.37, 3.28; P = .00), high incidences of overall postoperative complications (OR = 1.48; 95% CI: 1.22, 1.81; P = .00), medical postoperative complications (OR = 2.58; 95% CI: 1.91, 3.49; P = .00), in-hospital mortality (OR = 3.24; 95% CI: 2.43, 4.31; P = .00) and poor overall survival (HR = 1.96; 95% CI: 1.65, 2.27; P = .00).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the high burden of comorbidities, high incidences of postoperative complications and mortality, surgery for extremely elderly patients with GC requires deliberation. Individualized treatment is recommended for such patients.

Geographic variation in surgical practice patterns and outcomes for resected nonmetastatic gastric cancer in Ontario

Background

Gastrectomy with negative resection margins and adequate lymph node dissection is the cornerstone of curative treatment for gastric cancer (gc). However, gastrectomy is a complex and invasive operation with significant morbidity and mortality. Little is known about surgical practice patterns or short- and long-term outcomes in early-stage gc in Canada.

Methods

We undertook a population-based retrospective cohort study of patients with gc diagnosed between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2008. Chart review provided clinical and operative details such as disease stage, primary tumour location, surgical approach, operation, lymph nodes, and resection margins. Administrative data provided patient demographics, geography, and vital status. Variations in treatment and outcomes were compared for 14 local health integration networks. Descriptive statistics and log-rank tests were used to examine geographic variation.

Results

We identified 722 patients with nonmetastatic resected gc. We documented significant provincial variation in case mix, including primary tumour location, stage at diagnosis, and tumour grade. Short-term surgical outcomes varied across the province. The percentage of patients with 15 or fewer lymph nodes removed and examined varied from 41.8% to 73.8% (p = 0.02), and the rate of positive surgical margins ranged from 15.2% to 50.0% (p = 0.002). The 30-day surgical mortality rates did not vary statistically significantly across the province (p = 0.13); however, rates ranged from 0% to 16.7%. Overall 5-year survival was 44% and ranged from 31% to 55% across the province.

Conclusions

This cohort of patients with resected stages i-iii gc is the largest analyzed in Canada, providing important historical information about treatment outcomes. Understanding the causes of regional variation will support interventions aiming to improve gc operative outcomes in the cancer system.

Outcomes of Non-curative Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: An Analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP)

BACKGROUND

The surgical care of patients with metastatic gastric cancer (GC) remains debated. Despite level 1 evidence showing lack of survival benefit, surgery may be used for symptoms prevention or palliation. This study examined short-term postoperative outcomes of non-curative gastrectomy performed for metastatic GC.

METHODS

A multi-institutional retrospective cohort study was conducted using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) registry, including gastrectomies for GC (2007-2015). The primary outcome was 30-day major morbidity. Multivariable analysis examined the association between metastatic status and outcomes adjusted for relevant demographic and clinical covariates.

RESULTS

Of 5341 patients, 377 (7.1%) had metastases. Major morbidity was more common with metastases (29.4 vs. 19.6%; p < 0.001), driven by a higher rate of respiratory events. Prolonged hospital length of stay (beyond the 75th percentile: 11 days) was more likely with metastases than with no metastases (41.9 vs. 28.3%; p < 0.001). After adjustment, metastatic status was associated with major morbidity (odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.90). This association remained for respiratory events (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.07-2.33), 30-day mortality (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.38-3.48), and prolonged hospital stay (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.31-2.07).

CONCLUSION

Non-curative gastrectomy for metastatic GC was associated with significant major morbidity and mortality as well as a prolonged hospital stay, longer than expected for gastrectomy for non-metastatic GC. These data can inform decision making regarding non-curative gastrectomy, helping surgeons to weigh the risks of morbidity against the potential benefits and alternative therapeutic options.

Evaluating TNM stage prognostic ability in a population-based cohort of gastric adenocarcinoma patients in a low-incidence country

OBJECTIVES

TNM stage is the preeminent cancer staging system and a fundamental determinant of disease prognosis. Our goal was to evaluate the predictive power of TNM stage for gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC), in a low-incidence country.

METHODS

A province-wide chart review of GAC patients diagnosed from April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2008 was conducted in Ontario and linked to routinely collected vital status data with a follow-up on March 31, 2012. TNM staging was classified using the sixth and seventh Union International for Cancer Control/American Joint Committee on Cancer editions. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests compared stage-stratified survival estimates. Discrimination was evaluated using Harrell's C statistic.

RESULTS

The cohort included 2366 patients. One- and 5-year survival was 43% and 17%. Using the sixth edition, 9% of patients had stage I disease, 5.4% stage II, 7.3% stage III, and 64% stage IV; 15% were not staged. Using the seventh edition, 9% were stage I, 7.7% stage II, 16% stage III, and 54% stage IV; 14% were not staged. Stage-stratified 5-year survival ranged from 68% to 7% with the sixth edition and from 70% to 4% with the seventh edition. Harrell's C statistic was 0.64 (0.63-0.65) for the broad sixth edition staging categories and 0.68 (0.67-0.69) for the broad seventh edition. Discriminative power was similar for the refined stage categories and across multiple subgroup analyses; it was best in non-metastatic patients.

CONCLUSION

Existing staging systems for GAC used in North America predict individualized prognosis poorly. The creation of a more complex prediction tool is necessary to provide accurate and precise prognostication information to oncologists, patients, and their families.

DNM1L, a key prognostic predictor for gastric adenocarcinoma, is involved in cell proliferation, invasion, and apoptosis

Dynamin-1-like protein (DNM1L) encodes a member of the dynamin superfamily of GTPases. It mediates mitochondrial and peroxisomal division and is involved in the regulation of apoptosis. However, its role in gastric cancer remains unclear. MKN-45 gastric cancer cells were transfected with short hairpin RNA (shRNA) to suppress DNM1L expression. MTT, flow cytometry, and Transwell assays were used to detect the changes in cell proliferation, apoptosis, and invasion, respectively. Immunohistochemistry was used to detect DNM1L expression in gastric adenocarcinoma specimens, and the association of DNM1L expression with clinicopathological features and prognosis was analyzed. After the suppression of endogenous DNM1L expression in MKN-45 cells with shRNA, cell proliferation and invasion rates were significantly reduced, whereas apoptosis was significantly increased (all P<0.01). The expression of DNM1L was significantly higher in gastric adenocarcinoma specimens compared with that in pericarcinoma tissues (P<0.001). The expression of DNM1L increased with increasing infiltration depth, lymphatic metastasis, and higher tumor node metastasis stage (P<0.05). The expression of DNM1L associated negatively with prognosis (P<0.01). DNM1L plays a critical role in the proliferation, invasion and apoptosis of human gastric adenocarcinoma. DNM1L expression has prognostic significance for the survival of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma.

The impact of advanced age on short-term outcomes following gastric cancer resection: an ACS-NSQIP analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence on short-term outcomes for GC resection in elderly patients is limited by small samples from single-institutions. This study sought to examine the association between advanced age and short-term outcomes of gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC).

METHODS

Using ACS-NSQIP data, patients undergoing gastrectomy for GC (2007-2013) were identified. Primary outcome was 30-day major morbidity. Outcomes were compared across age categories (<65, 65-70, 71-75, 76-80, >80 years old). Univariable and multivariable regression was used to estimate the morbidity risk associated with age.

RESULTS

Of 3637 patients, 60.6% were ≥65 years old. Major morbidity increased with age, from 16.3% (<65 years old) to 21.5% (76-80 years old), and 24.1% (>80 years old) (p < 0.001), driven by higher respiratory and infectious events. Perioperative 30-day mortality increased from 1.2% (<65years old) to 6.5% (>80 years old) (p < 0.0001). After adjustments, age was independently associated with morbidity for 76-80 years of age (RR 1.31, 95% CI, 1.08-1.60) and >80 years old (RR 1.49, 95% CI, 1.23-1.81). Predicted morbidity increased by 18.6% in those 75-80 years old and 27.5% in those >80 years old (compared to <65 years old) for total gastrectomy, and by 11.6% and 17.2% for subtotal gastrectomy, for worst case scenario. Morbidity increased by 5.1% in those 75-80 years old and 7.6% in those >80 years old for total gastrectomy, and by 3.1% and 4.7% for subtotal gastrectomy, for best case scenario.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced age, defined as more than 75 years, was independently associated with increased morbidity after GC resection. The magnitude of this impact is further modulated by clinical scenarios. Increased risk in elderly GC patient should be recognized and considered in indications for resection.

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.

Diagnostic performance of confocal laser endomicroscopy for atrophy and gastric intestinal metaplasia: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE) for gastric atrophy (GA) and gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM).

METHODS

Literature search was performed in PubMed and the Cochrane Library for CLE, GA and GIM. The sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) in diagnosing GA and GIM were pooled for analysis. A summary receiver operating curve (SROC) was documented and the area under the curve was calculated.

RESULTS

Of the 10 studies included in this current analysis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity and DOR of CLE to diagnose GA and GIM were found to be 88%, 98% and 330.85, and 93%, 98% and 439.97, respectively. The area under the SROC were 0.9491 and 0.9812 for the diagnosis of GA and GIM, respectively. Higher sensitivity and specificity of this technique in diagnosing GA and GIM were found in patients without representative disease spectrum and those received pCLE by subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSION

CLE is of great value and may be considered an alternative modality for the early diagnosis of GA and GIM.

Regional variation in the management of metastatic gastric cancer in Ontario

BACKGROUND

Geographic variation in cancer care is common when clear clinical management guidelines do not exist. In the present study, we sought to describe health care resource consumption by patients with metastatic gastric cancer (gc) and to investigate the possibility of regional variation.

METHODS

In this population-based cohort study of patients with stage iv gastric adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2008, chart review and administrative health care data were linked to study resource utilization outcomes (for example, clinical investigations, treatments) in the province of Ontario. The study took a health care system perspective with a 2-year time frame. Chi-square tests were used to compare proportions of resource utilization, and analysis of variance compared mean per-patient resource consumption between geographic regions.

RESULTS

A cohort of 1433 patients received 4690 endoscopic investigations, 12,033 computed tomography exams, 12,774 radiography exams, and 5059 ultrasonography exams. Nearly all patients were seen by a general practitioner (98%) and a specialist (99%), and were hospitalized (95%) or visited the emergency department (87%). Fewer than half received chemotherapy (43%), gastrectomy (37%), or radiotherapy (28%). The mean number of clinical investigations, physician visits, hospitalizations, and instances of patient accessing the emergency department or receiving radiotherapy or stent placement varied significantly by region.

CONCLUSIONS

Variations in health care resource utilization for metastatic gc patients are observed across the regions of Ontario. Whether those differences reflect differential access to resources, patient preference, or physician preference is not known. The observed variation might reflect a lack of guidelines based on high-quality evidence and could partly be ameliorated with regionalization of gc care to high-volume centres.

Prognostic factors in metastatic gastric cancer: results of a population-based, retrospective cohort study in Ontario

BACKGROUND

Stage IV gastric cancer is lethal, and little population-based research on prognostic factors has been performed in low-incidence countries. Therefore, we investigated the consistency of the associations of patient, disease and healthcare system factors identified in previous population-based research to understand their generalizability to other low-incidence populations.

METHODS

A population-based, retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with Stage IV gastric cancer in Ontario between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2008 was performed. Kaplan-Meier methodology and the log-rank test were used for bivariate analysis. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression was performed. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are presented.

RESULTS

On multivariate analysis, patient, disease and healthcare system factors were independent predictors of survival. Increasing age per 10 years (HR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02-1.10), a tumor located in the gastroesophageal junction (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.94-1.27) or middle of the stomach (HR 1.14; 95% CI 0.97-1.35), presence of carcinomatosis (HR 1.61; 95% CI 1.42-1.83) and a larger burden of metastatic disease (2-3 sites of metastatic disease: HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.03-1.32; ≥ 4 sites: HR 1.69; 95% CI 1.30-2.20) were associated with worse prognosis. Female gender, receipt of surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy and treatment from a high-volume, gastric cancer specialist were all associated with significantly better prognosis. In addition, there was evidence of significant geographic variation in survival.

CONCLUSION

This study provides supporting evidence for patient, disease and healthcare system prognostic factors in metastatic gastric cancer. Future work investigating the role of emerging molecular and biologic information will need to take these established prognostic factors into consideration.

Surgical management of advanced gastric cancer: An evolving issue

Worldwide, gastric cancer represents the fifth most common cancer and the third leading cause of cancer deaths. Although the overall 5-year survival for resectable disease was more than 70% in Japan due to the implementation of screening programs resulting in detection of disease at earlier stages, in Western countries more than two thirds of gastric cancers are usually diagnosed in advanced stages reporting a 5-year survival rate of only 25.7%. Anyway surgical resection with extended lymph node dissection remains the only curative therapy for non-metastatic advanced gastric cancer, while neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapies can improve the outcomes aimed at the reduction of recurrence and extension of survival. High-quality research and advances in technologies have contributed to well define the oncological outcomes and have stimulated many clinical studies testing multimodality managements in the advanced disease setting. This review article aims to outline and discuss open issues in current surgical management of advanced gastric cancer.

Noncurative Resection for Gastric Cancer Patients: Who Could Benefit? : Determining Prognostic Factors for Patient Selection

BACKGROUND

Resections have long been recommended for patients with incurable gastric cancer. However, high morbidity rates and more efficient chemotherapy regimens have demanded more accurate patient selection. The aim of this study was to analyze the results of gastric cancer patients treated with noncurative resection in a single cancer center.

METHODS

Medical charts of patients treated with a noncurative resection between January 1988 and December 2012 were analyzed. Individuals who had M1 disease were included, along with those with no metastasis but who had an R2 resection. Morbidity, mortality, and survival prognostic factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the period, 192 patients were resected, 159 with previously diagnosed metastatic disease and the other 33 having resection with macroscopic residual disease (R2). A distal gastrectomy was performed in 117 patients and a total resection in 75, with a more limited lymph node dissection in 70 % of cases. A multivisceral resection was deemed necessary in 42 individuals (21.9 %). Overall morbidity was 26.6 % and 60-day mortality was 6.8 %. Splenectomy was the only independent prognostic factor for higher morbidity. Median survival was 10 months, and younger age, distal resection, and chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for survival. A prognostic score obtained from these factors identified a 20-month median survival in patients with these favorable characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Noncurative surgery may be considered in selected gastric cancer patients as long as it has low morbidity and allows the realization of chemotherapy.

Recent trends and predictors of multimodality treatment for oesophageal, oesophagogastric junction, and gastric cancer: A Dutch cohort-study

BACKGROUND

In recent years, evidence supporting multimodality treatment for oesophageal, oesophagogastric junction (OGJ), and gastric cancer has accumulated. This population-based cohort-study investigates trends and predictors of utilisation of multimodality treatment for oesophagogastric cancer in the Netherlands.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry regarding patients with oesophageal (n = 5450), OGJ (n = 2168) and gastric cancer (n = 6683) without distant metastases who had undergone R0 or R1 surgery diagnosed between 2000 and 2012. Follow-up was completed until February 2014. Preoperative/postoperative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy combined with surgery were considered multimodality treatment. Logistic regression analysis was performed to analyse the association of age, gender, socioeconomic status, clinical T and N classification, hospital type, comprehensive cancer centre network region, and year of diagnosis, with multimodality treatment receipt. Additional analyses were performed to explore differences in trends of utilisation of multimodality treatment between academic and non-academic hospitals.

RESULTS

Multimodality treatment utilisation for oesophageal, OGJ and gastric cancer increased significantly to 90%, 85% and 56% in 2012, respectively. In oesophageal and OGJ cancer patients, preoperative chemoradiotherapy was most frequently administered (85% and 47% in 2012, respectively), and in gastric cancer patients preoperative chemotherapy (47% in 2012). Lower age, higher clinical T and N classification, and diagnosis in more recent years were significantly associated with more frequent multimodality treatment receipt. The adoption of most types of multimodality treatment in academic hospitals preceded non-academic hospitals by a year.

CONCLUSION

In the Netherlands, the utilisation of multimodality treatment for oesophagogastric cancer has significantly increased during the past decade, especially in oesophageal and OGJ cancer. Multimodality treatment utilisation was especially dependent on patient and tumour characteristics and year of diagnosis, but multimodality treatment trends seem to be related to the publication of landmark studies, participation in nationally running clinical trials, and hospital type, preceding national guidelines.

The role of cullin proteins in gastric cancer

The cullin proteins are a family of scaffolding proteins that associate with RING proteins and ubiquitin E3 ligases and mediate substrate-receptor bindings. Thus, cullin proteins regulate the specificity of ubiquitin targeting in the regulation of proteins involved in various cellular processes, including proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis. There are seven cullin proteins that have been identified in eukaryotes: CUL1, CUL2, CUL3, CUL4A, CUL4B, CUL5, and CUL7/p53-associated parkin-like cytoplasmic protein. All of these proteins contain a conserved cullin homology domain that binds to RING box proteins. Cullin-RING ubiquitin ligase complexes are activated upon post-translational modification by neural precursor cell-expressed, developmentally downregulated protein 8. The aberrant expression of several cullin proteins has been implicated in many cancers though the significance in gastric cancer has been less well investigated. This review provides the first systematic discussion of the associations between all members of the cullin protein family and gastric cancer. Functional and regulatory mechanisms of cullin proteins in gastric carcinoma progression are also summarized along with a discussion concerning future research areas. Accumulating evidence suggests a critical role of cullin proteins in tumorigenesis, and a better understanding of the function of these individual cullin proteins and their targets will help identify potential biomarkers and therapeutic targets.

Is England closing the international gap in cancer survival?

BACKGROUND

We provide an up-to-date international comparison of cancer survival, assessing whether England is 'closing the gap' compared with other high-income countries.

METHODS

Net survival was estimated using national, population-based, cancer registrations for 1.9 million patients diagnosed with a cancer of the stomach, colon, rectum, lung, breast (women) or ovary in England during 1995-2012. Trends during 1995-2009 were compared with estimates for Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Clinicians were interviewed to help interpret trends.

RESULTS

Survival from all cancers remained lower in England than in Australia, Canada, Norway and Sweden by 2005-2009. For some cancers, survival improved more in England than in other countries between 1995-1999 and 2005-2009; for example, 1-year survival from stomach, rectal, lung, breast and ovarian cancers improved more than in Australia and Canada. There has been acceleration in lung cancer survival improvement in England recently, with average annual improvement in 1-year survival rising to 2% during 2010-2012. Survival improved more in Denmark than in England for rectal and lung cancers between 1995-1999 and 2005-2009.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival has increased in England since the mid-1990s in the context of strategic reform in cancer control, however, survival remains lower than in comparable developed countries and continued investment is needed to close the international survival gap.

Three-port laparoscopic exploration is not sufficient for patients with T4 gastric cancer

Gastric cancer continues to be a leading cause of cancer death. The majority of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma in China present with advanced disease. Ruling out unresectable cancers from an unnecessary ''open'' exploration is very important. The aim of this study was to assess the value of five-port anatomical laparoscopic exploration in T4 gastric cancer in comparison with three-port laparoscopic exploration and laparotomy exploration. We conducted a retrospective study on 126 patients with T4 stage scheduled for D2 curative gastrectomy based on computed tomography (CT) staging at Department of Gastric Cancer and Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, from Apr. 2011 to Apr. 2013. Laparotomy exploration (Group I), three-port laparoscopic exploration (Group II) or five-port anatomical laparoscopic exploration (Group III) were performed prior to radical gastrectomy. Accuracy rate for feasibility of D2 curative gastrectomy in laparotomy exploration and five-port anatomical laparoscopic exploration groups was higher than that in the three-port laparoscopic exploration group. Five-port anatomical laparoscopic exploration group had the highest accuracy resection rate (Group I vs Group II vs Group III,92.6% vs78.6% vs 97.7%; p<0.05) and shorter length of hospitalization (Group I vs Group II vs Group III, 9.58±4.17 vs 6.13±2.85 vs 5.00±1.81; p<0.001). Three-port laparoscopic exploration has low accuracy rate for assessing feasibility of D2 curative gastrectomy and five-port anatomical laparoscopic exploration should be performed on patients with T4 gastric cancer.

Personalized Surgery for Gastric Adenocarcinoma: A Meta-analysis of D1 versus D2 Lymphadenectomy

BACKGROUND

The recent publication of 5-year survival data for the Italian Gastric Cancer Study Group (IGCSG) D1 versus D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer trial adds important data for analysis of whether a D2 lymphadenectomy improves survival.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 1985 to February 1, 2014. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan version 5 software. Long-term outcomes were analyzed. Subgroup analyses of T and N stage were performed.

RESULTS

Outcomes of four randomized, controlled trials involving 1,599 patients (823 D1: 776 D2) enrolled from 1982 to 2005 were included for qualitative analysis and quantitative meta-analysis. Despite the addition of long-term survival data from the IGCSG, 5-year overall and nodal status survival was similar between D1 and D2 trials. However, subgroup analysis revealed a survival benefit for T3 patients (odds ratio 1.64, 95 % confidence interval 1.01-2.67) and a trend for survival benefit for advanced nodal stage (odds ratio 1.36, 95 % confidence interval 0.98-1.87) with D2 compared with D1 lymphadenectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

As recent studies have demonstrated comparable short-term surgical outcomes for both D1 and D2 lymphadenectomies, consideration should be made for more extensive lymph node dissection among patients with advanced stage.

What studies are appropriate and necessary for staging gastric adenocarcinoma? Results of an international RAND/UCLA expert panel

BACKGROUND

The approach for staging gastric adenocarcinoma (GC) has not been well defined, with heterogeneity in the application of staging modalities.

METHODS

Utilizing a RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology (RAM), a multidisciplinary expert panel of 16 physicians scored 84 GC staging scenarios. Appropriateness was scored from 1 to 9. Median appropriateness scores from 1 to 3 were considered inappropriate, 4-6 uncertain, and 7-9 appropriate. Agreement was reached when 12 or more of 16 panelists scored the scenario similarly. Appropriate scenarios were subsequently scored for necessity.

RESULTS

Pretreatment TNM stage determination is necessary. Necessary staging maneuvers include esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD); biopsy of the tumor; documentation of tumor size, description, location, distance from gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), and any GEJ, esophageal, or duodenal involvement; if an EGD report is unclear, surgeons should repeat it to confirm tumor location. Pretreatment radiologic assessment should include computed tomography (CT)-abdomen and CT-pelvis, performed with multidetector CT scanners with 5-mm slices. Laparoscopy should be performed before resection of cT3-cT4 lesions or multivisceral resections. Laparoscopy should include inspection of the stomach, diaphragm, liver, and ovaries.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a RAM, we describe appropriate and necessary staging tests for the pretreatment staging evaluation of GC, as well as how some of these staging maneuvers should be conducted.

Optimal management of gastric cancer: results from an international RAND/UCLA expert panel

OBJECTIVE

Defining processes of care, which are appropriate and necessary for management of gastric cancer (GC), is an important step toward improving outcomes.

METHODS

Using a RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, an international multidisciplinary expert panel created 22 statements reflecting optimal management. All statements were scored for appropriateness and necessity.

RESULTS

The following tenets were scored appropriate and necessary: (1) preoperative staging by computed tomography of abdomen/pelvis; (2) positron-emission tomographic scans not routinely indicated; (3) consideration for adjuvant therapy; (4) further clinical trials; (5) multidisciplinary decision making; (6) sufficient support at hospitals; (7) assessment of 16 or more lymph nodes (LNs); (8) in metastatic disease, surgery only for palliation of major symptoms; (9) surgeons experienced in GC management; (10) and surgeons experienced in both GC management and advanced laparoscopic surgery for laparoscopic resection. The following were scored appropriate, but of indeterminate necessity: (1) diagnostic laparoscopy before treatment; (2) a multidisciplinary approach to linitis plastica; (3) genetic assessment for diffuse GC and family history, or age less than 45 years; (4) endoscopic removal of select T1aN0 lesions; (5) D2 LN dissection in curative intent cases; (6) D1 LN dissection for early GC or patients with comorbidities; (7) frozen section analysis of margins; (8) nonemergent cases performed in a hospital with a volume of more than 15 resections per year; and (9) by a surgeon with more than 6 resection per year.

CONCLUSIONS

The expert panel has created 22 statements for the perioperative management of GC patients, to provide guidance to clinicians and improve the care received by patients.

Location, size, and distance: criteria for quality in esophagogastroduodenos copy reporting for pre-operative gastric cancer evaluation

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of existing literature regarding the quality of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) reporting for gastric cancer evaluation. This study aims to determine criteria for quality endoscopic evaluation of gastric cancer in North America by identifying important features of the EGD report for pre-operative evaluation of gastric cancer and assessing inclusion of these features in existing reports.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with experienced endoscopists from community and academic hospitals affiliated with the University of Toronto to identify essential elements for an EGD report. Then, 225 EGD reports from 2005 to 2008 were evaluated by two trained reviewers for inclusion of recommended EGD report elements and global assessment of report quality and adequacy for surgical planning.

RESULTS

Essential elements recommended by interviewed endoscopists include tumor size, location, and distance from gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). Approximately 95 % of all reports documented the location of lesions, <5 % documented distance from the GEJ, and <15 % documented tumor size. Overall report quality was rated as excellent for 4-5 % of reports; 20-42 % of all reports were deemed to be adequate for surgical planning. All surgeons interviewed as part of the endoscopist panel indicated that they would repeat the EGD before consulting with patients regarding surgical planning.

CONCLUSIONS

For pre-operative evaluation of gastric cancer, tumor size, location, and distance from key anatomical landmarks were proposed as essential elements of a quality EGD report. Most of the reviewed reports did not document these elements. Report quality is perceived to be poor and may lead to repeat endoscopy. Developing a standardized EGD reporting format based on inclusion of individual parameters can improve the quality of gastric cancer management.

Laparoscopy and peritoneal cytology: important prognostic tools to guide treatment selection in gastric adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have suggested that patients with occult peritoneal metastases not seen on preoperative imaging have poor prognosis. In this study, we aim to evaluate the utility and impact of staging laparoscopy and peritoneal cytology in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma managed at two major metropolitan hospitals in Melbourne, Australia, between January 1999 and July 2010 was undertaken. The main outcome measures were the number of patients in whom laparoscopy and/or peritoneal cytology changed treatment intent, and the overall survival of patients with occult metastases detected by laparoscopy/cytology.

RESULTS

Staging laparoscopy as an independent procedure was performed in 74.3% (148/199) of patients who had neither unequivocal metastases (M1) on preoperative imaging nor early T1 disease on endoscopic ultrasound. Laparoscopy/cytology detected occult metastases in 38 (25.6%) patients (27 macroscopic M1 and 11 microscopic M1 with positive peritoneal cytology only), leading to change in the treatment intent in 37 cases. The median overall survivals of patients with metastatic disease detected at staging laparoscopy (8.3 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.4-16.5) or on peritoneal cytology (4.9 months, 95% CI 4.2-48) were as poor as those with M1 disease seen on preoperative imaging (6.7 months, 95% CI 4.2-8.9), P = 0.97.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy and peritoneal cytology add incremental value to modern imaging in the staging of gastric adenocarcinomas by detecting occult metastatic disease. Their utility needs to be optimized to allow better treatment selection for gastric cancer patients.

Effective palliation and quality of life outcomes in studies of surgery for advanced, non-curative gastric cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Relief of symptoms should be the primary focus of palliative treatment as defined by the World Health Organization. Evaluating the effectiveness of palliative interventions should incorporate this goal and include quality of life (QOL) outcome assessments. A systematic review of the surgical gastric cancer literature was performed to summarize the effectiveness of palliative surgical interventions in addressing QOL.

METHODS

An electronic literature search of EMBASE, Medline, and the Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials was performed from January 1, 1985 to December 1, 2009. English language abstracts and articles were reviewed independently by two reviewers. A systematic approach to data abstraction and presentation was followed.

RESULTS

No articles were identified as reporting true QOL outcomes using reliable, validated QOL instruments in surgically managed, advanced gastric cancer patients. Nine articles were identified as reporting outcomes measuring effectiveness of palliation. Commonly reported pre-procedure symptoms were weight loss, abdominal pain, vomiting, obstruction, and bleeding. Time to oral intake was reported in 5 of 9 studies, ranging from a mean of 2.9 days (laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy) to 8 days (surgical bypass). Length of postoperative inpatient stay ranged from a mean of 7 days (gastrojejunostomy) to 28 days (surgical bypass). Other measures of effective palliation included measures of clinical success, hospital re-admission rates, and post-procedure analgesic intake.

CONCLUSION

A paucity of literature exists regarding the QOL of surgically managed gastric cancer patients. Prospectively designed studies using credible QOL measures are necessary to better inform the treatment decision-making process for these patients.

A systematic review of surgery for non-curative gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Most gastric cancer patients present with advanced stage disease precluding curative surgical treatment. These patients may be considered for palliative resection or bypass in the presence of major symptoms; however, the utility of surgery for non-curative, asymptomatic advanced disease is debated and the appropriate treatment strategy unclear.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the non-curative surgical literature to better understand the limitations and benefits of non-curative surgery for advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

A literature search for non-curative surgical interventions in gastric cancer was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from 1 January 1985 to 1 December 2009. All abstracts were independently rated for relevance by a minimum of two reviewers. Outcomes of interest were procedure-related morbidity, mortality, and survival.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine articles were included; the majority were retrospective, single institution case series. Definitions describing the treatment intent for gastrectomy were incomplete in most studies. Only five were truly performed with relief of symptoms as the primary indication for surgery, while the majority were considered non-curative or not otherwise specified. High rates of procedure-related morbidity and mortality were demonstrated for all surgeries across the majority of studies and treatment-intent categories. Median and 1-year survival were poor, and values ranged widely within surgical approaches and across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

A lack of transparent documentation of disease burden and symptoms limits the surgical literature in non-curative gastric cancer. Improved survival is not evident for all patients receiving non-curative gastrectomy. Further prospective research is required to determine the optimal intervention for palliative gastric cancer patients.

A systematic review of the accuracy and indications for diagnostic laparoscopy prior to curative-intent resection of gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Despite improved preoperative imaging techniques, patients with incurable or unresectable gastric cancer are still subjected to non-therapeutic laparotomy. Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) has been advocated by some to be essential in decision-making in gastric cancer. We aimed to identify and synthesize findings on the value of DL for patients with gastric cancer, in this era of improved preoperative imaging.

METHODS

Electronic literature searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2009. We calculated the change in management and avoidance of laparotomy based on the addition of DL and laparoscopic ultrasound (LUS). The accuracy, agreement (kappa), sensitivity, and specificity of DL in assessing tumor extent, nodal involvement, and the presence of metastases with respect to the gold standard (pathology) were also calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-one articles were included. DL showed moderate to substantial agreement with final pathology for T stage, but only fair agreement for N stage. For M staging, DL had an overall accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity ranging from 85-98.9%, 64.3-94%, and 80-100%, respectively. The use of DL altered treatment in 8.5-59.6% of cases, avoiding laparotomy in 8.5-43.8% of cases. LUS provided additional benefit in 5.8-7.2% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite evolving preoperative imaging techniques, diagnostic laparoscopy continues to be of substantial value in staging patients with gastric cancer and in avoiding unnecessary laparotomy. The current data support DL for all patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Staging laparoscopy in the management of gastric cancer: a population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Staging laparoscopy can detect radiographically occult peritoneal metastases and prevent futile laparotomy in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. We sought to assess the use of staging laparoscopy for gastric adenocarcinoma in a cohort of older patients and to compare outcomes after laparoscopy alone with nontherapeutic laparotomy.

STUDY DESIGN

Using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) population-based cancer registry data linked with Medicare claims, we identified patients aged 65 or older diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma between 1998 and 2005. We defined staging laparoscopy as a laparoscopic procedure from 1 month before the date of diagnosis until death and futile laparotomy as a laparotomy in the absence of a therapeutic intervention. We examined trends in the use of staging laparoscopy and compared outcomes between patients who underwent staging laparoscopy alone and those who had a futile laparotomy.

RESULTS

Of 11,759 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma, 6,388 (54.3%) had at least 1 surgical procedure. Staging laparoscopy was performed in 506 (7.9%) patients who had any surgery, and 151 (29.8%) of these patients did not have a subsequent therapeutic intervention. Patients who underwent staging laparoscopy alone had a significantly lower rate of in-hospital mortality (5.3% vs 13.1%, p < 0.001) and shorter length of hospitalization (2 vs 10 days, p < 0.001) than patients who had futile laparotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings in this large, population-based cohort suggest that staging laparoscopy is used infrequently in the management of older patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. Increased use of staging laparoscopy could reduce the substantial morbidity and mortality associated with nontherapeutic laparotomy.