Evaluation of three lymph node staging systems for prognostic prediction in gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Ming Cheng, Yang Yu, Takehiro Watanabe, Yutaro Yoshimoto, Sanae Kaji, Yukinori Yube, Munehisa Kaneda, Hajime Orita, Shinji Mine, You-Yong Wu, Tetsu Fukunaga
{"title":"Evaluation of three lymph node staging systems for prognostic prediction in gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Ming Cheng, Yang Yu, Takehiro Watanabe, Yutaro Yoshimoto, Sanae Kaji, Yukinori Yube, Munehisa Kaneda, Hajime Orita, Shinji Mine, You-Yong Wu, Tetsu Fukunaga","doi":"10.4251/wjgo.v17.i3.98103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lymph node status is a critical prognostic factor in gastric cancer (GC), but stage migration may occur in pathological lymph nodes (pN) staging. To address this, alternative staging systems such as the positive lymph node ratio (LNR) and log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS) were introduced.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess the prognostic accuracy and stratification efficacy of three nodal staging systems in GC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review identified 12 studies, from which hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) were summarized. Sensitivity analyses, subgroup analyses, publication bias assessments, and quality evaluations were conducted. To enhance comparability, data from studies with identical cutoff values for pN, LNR, and LODDS were pooled. Homogeneous stratification was then applied to generate Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival curves, assessing the stratification efficacy of three staging systems.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The HRs and 95% confidence intervals for pN, LNR, and LODDS were 2.16 (1.72-2.73), 2.05 (1.65-2.55), and 3.15 (2.15-4.37), respectively, confirming all three as independent prognostic risk factors for OS. Comparative analysis of HRs demonstrated that LODDS had superior prognostic predictive power over LNR and pN. KM curves for pN (N0, N1, N2, N3a, N3b), LNR (0.1/0.2/0.5), and LODDS (-1.5/-1.0/-0.5/0) revealed significant differences (<i>P</i> < 0.001) among all prognostic stratifications. Mean differences and standard deviations in 60-month relative survival were 27.93% ± 0.29%, 41.70% ± 0.30%, and 26.60% ± 0.28% for pN, LNR, and LODDS, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All three staging systems are independent prognostic factors for OS. LODDS demonstrated the highest specificity, making it especially useful for predicting outcomes, while pN was the most effective in homogeneous stratification, offering better patient differentiation. These findings highlight the complementary roles of LODDS and pN in enhancing prognostic accuracy and stratification.</p>","PeriodicalId":23762,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology","volume":"17 3","pages":"98103"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11866223/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v17.i3.98103","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Lymph node status is a critical prognostic factor in gastric cancer (GC), but stage migration may occur in pathological lymph nodes (pN) staging. To address this, alternative staging systems such as the positive lymph node ratio (LNR) and log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS) were introduced.

Aim: To assess the prognostic accuracy and stratification efficacy of three nodal staging systems in GC.

Methods: A systematic review identified 12 studies, from which hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) were summarized. Sensitivity analyses, subgroup analyses, publication bias assessments, and quality evaluations were conducted. To enhance comparability, data from studies with identical cutoff values for pN, LNR, and LODDS were pooled. Homogeneous stratification was then applied to generate Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival curves, assessing the stratification efficacy of three staging systems.

Results: The HRs and 95% confidence intervals for pN, LNR, and LODDS were 2.16 (1.72-2.73), 2.05 (1.65-2.55), and 3.15 (2.15-4.37), respectively, confirming all three as independent prognostic risk factors for OS. Comparative analysis of HRs demonstrated that LODDS had superior prognostic predictive power over LNR and pN. KM curves for pN (N0, N1, N2, N3a, N3b), LNR (0.1/0.2/0.5), and LODDS (-1.5/-1.0/-0.5/0) revealed significant differences (P < 0.001) among all prognostic stratifications. Mean differences and standard deviations in 60-month relative survival were 27.93% ± 0.29%, 41.70% ± 0.30%, and 26.60% ± 0.28% for pN, LNR, and LODDS, respectively.

Conclusion: All three staging systems are independent prognostic factors for OS. LODDS demonstrated the highest specificity, making it especially useful for predicting outcomes, while pN was the most effective in homogeneous stratification, offering better patient differentiation. These findings highlight the complementary roles of LODDS and pN in enhancing prognostic accuracy and stratification.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
1082
期刊介绍: The World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology (WJGO) is a leading academic journal devoted to reporting the latest, cutting-edge research progress and findings of basic research and clinical practice in the field of gastrointestinal oncology.
×
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