Histopathological response to chemotherapy and survival of mucinous type gastric cancer

Irene A Caspers, Astrid E Slagter, Pauline A J Vissers, Martha Lopez-Yurda, Laurens V Beerepoot, Jelle P Ruurda, Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen, Suzanne S Gisbertz, Mark I Van Berge Henegouwen, Henk H Hartgrink, Danny Goudkade, Liudmila L Kodach, Johanna W Van Sandick, Marcel Verheij, Rob H A Verhoeven, Annemieke Cats, Nicole C T Van Grieken
{"title":"Histopathological response to chemotherapy and survival of mucinous type gastric cancer","authors":"Irene A Caspers, Astrid E Slagter, Pauline A J Vissers, Martha Lopez-Yurda, Laurens V Beerepoot, Jelle P Ruurda, Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen, Suzanne S Gisbertz, Mark I Van Berge Henegouwen, Henk H Hartgrink, Danny Goudkade, Liudmila L Kodach, Johanna W Van Sandick, Marcel Verheij, Rob H A Verhoeven, Annemieke Cats, Nicole C T Van Grieken","doi":"10.1093/jnci/djae227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Data on the clinicopathological characteristics of mucinous gastric cancer (muc-GC) are limited. This study compares the clinical outcome and response to chemotherapy between patients with resectable muc-GC, intestinal (int-GC) and diffuse (dif-GC) gastric cancer. Methods Patients from the D1/D2 study or the CRITICS trial were included in exploratory surgery-alone (SAtest) or chemotherapy test (CTtest) cohorts. Real-world data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry on patients treated between with surgery-alone (SAvalidation), and receiving preoperative chemotherapy with or without postoperative treatment (CTvalidation) were used for validation. Histopathological subtypes were extracted from pathology reports filed in the Dutch Pathology Registry and correlated with tumor regression grade (TRG) and relative survival (RS). Results In SAtest (n = 549) and SAvalidation (n = 8062) cohorts, muc-GC patients had a five-year RS of 39% and 31%, similar to or slightly better than dif-GC (43% and 29%, p = .52 and p = .011), but worse than int-GC (55% and 42%, p = .11 and p < .001). In CTtest (n = 651) and CTvalidation (n = 2889) cohorts, muc-GC showed favorable TRG (38% and 44% (near-)complete response) compared to int-GC (26% and 35%) and dif-GC (10% and 28%, p < .001 and p = .005). The 5-year RS in CTtest and CTvalidation cohorts for muc-GC (53% and 48%) and int-GC (58% and 59%) was significantly better compared to dif-GC (35% and 38%, p = .004 and p < .001). Conclusion Recognizing and incorporating muc-GC into treatment decision-making of resectable GC can lead to more personalized and effective approaches, given its favorable response to preoperative chemotherapy in relation to int-GC and dif-GC and its favorable prognostic outcomes in relation to dif-GC.","PeriodicalId":501635,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the National Cancer Institute","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the National Cancer Institute","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djae227","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Data on the clinicopathological characteristics of mucinous gastric cancer (muc-GC) are limited. This study compares the clinical outcome and response to chemotherapy between patients with resectable muc-GC, intestinal (int-GC) and diffuse (dif-GC) gastric cancer. Methods Patients from the D1/D2 study or the CRITICS trial were included in exploratory surgery-alone (SAtest) or chemotherapy test (CTtest) cohorts. Real-world data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry on patients treated between with surgery-alone (SAvalidation), and receiving preoperative chemotherapy with or without postoperative treatment (CTvalidation) were used for validation. Histopathological subtypes were extracted from pathology reports filed in the Dutch Pathology Registry and correlated with tumor regression grade (TRG) and relative survival (RS). Results In SAtest (n = 549) and SAvalidation (n = 8062) cohorts, muc-GC patients had a five-year RS of 39% and 31%, similar to or slightly better than dif-GC (43% and 29%, p = .52 and p = .011), but worse than int-GC (55% and 42%, p = .11 and p < .001). In CTtest (n = 651) and CTvalidation (n = 2889) cohorts, muc-GC showed favorable TRG (38% and 44% (near-)complete response) compared to int-GC (26% and 35%) and dif-GC (10% and 28%, p < .001 and p = .005). The 5-year RS in CTtest and CTvalidation cohorts for muc-GC (53% and 48%) and int-GC (58% and 59%) was significantly better compared to dif-GC (35% and 38%, p = .004 and p < .001). Conclusion Recognizing and incorporating muc-GC into treatment decision-making of resectable GC can lead to more personalized and effective approaches, given its favorable response to preoperative chemotherapy in relation to int-GC and dif-GC and its favorable prognostic outcomes in relation to dif-GC.
粘液型胃癌对化疗的组织病理学反应和生存率
背景 有关粘液性胃癌(muc-GC)临床病理特征的数据十分有限。本研究比较了可切除粘液性胃癌、肠癌(int-GC)和弥漫性胃癌(dif-GC)患者的临床疗效和对化疗的反应。方法 将D1/D2研究或CRITICS试验的患者纳入探索性单独手术(SAtest)或化疗试验(CTtest)队列。荷兰癌症登记处(Netherlands Cancer Registry)提供的真实世界数据被用于验证,这些数据包括接受单纯手术治疗(SA验证)和接受术前化疗与或不接受术后治疗(CT验证)的患者。组织病理学亚型从荷兰病理登记处的病理报告中提取,并与肿瘤回归分级(TRG)和相对生存率(RS)相关联。结果 在SAtest(n = 549)和SAvalidation(n = 8062)队列中,粘液-GC患者的五年RS分别为39%和31%,与dif-GC(43%和29%,p = .52和p = .011)相似或略好,但比int-GC(55%和42%,p = .11和p < .001)差。在 CTtest(n = 651)和 CTvalidation(n = 2889)队列中,与 int-GC (26% 和 35%)和 dif-GC (10% 和 28%,p < .001 和 p = .005)相比,muc-GC 显示出良好的 TRG(38% 和 44%(接近)完全应答)。在 CTtest 和 CTvalidation 队列中,粘液-GC(53% 和 48%)和 int-GC(58% 和 59%)的 5 年 RS 显著优于 dif-GC(35% 和 38%,p = .004 和 p &;lt; .001)。结论 识别粘液型 GC 并将其纳入可切除 GC 的治疗决策中,可使治疗方法更加个性化和有效,因为粘液型 GC 对术前化疗的反应优于 int-GC 和 dif-GC,其预后结果也优于 dif-GC。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信