评估腹膜弹性层浸润对pT3型胃癌患者分层的改善作用。

IF 5.1 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Gastric Cancer Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-24 DOI:10.1007/s10120-025-01627-5
Daiki Terajima, Motohiro Kojima, Shingo Sakashita, Tetsuro Taki, Takahiro Kinoshita, Genichiro Ishii, Naoya Sakamoto
{"title":"评估腹膜弹性层浸润对pT3型胃癌患者分层的改善作用。","authors":"Daiki Terajima, Motohiro Kojima, Shingo Sakashita, Tetsuro Taki, Takahiro Kinoshita, Genichiro Ishii, Naoya Sakamoto","doi":"10.1007/s10120-025-01627-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Elastic laminal invasion (ELI), defined as tumor invasion beyond the peritoneal elastic lamina, may affect gastric cancer (GC) prognosis, though limited data exist on this relationship.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed representative pathological slides from 396 patients with pT3 or pT4a GC who underwent curative resection to assess the association between ELI and relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 5-year RFS of pT3 GC with negative ELI was 85.9%, which was better than the 55.9% of that of ELI-positive pT3 (P < 0.001) or pT4a (51.3%) GC (P < 0.001). Similarly, the 5-year OS of ELI-negative pT3 GC was 90.4%, while the corresponding values for ELI-positive pT3 and pT4a were 67.0% (P < 0.001) and 63.6% (P < 0.001), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that the most significant prognostic factors for RFS were pT factors (i.e., pT3 with ELI/pT4), tumor size (≥ 80 mm), and nodal metastasis. We subdivided our cohort of patients with pathological stage II (pT3N0, pT3N1) GC into ELI-negative and ELI-positive subgroups, and found that the ELI-negative ones had better RFS percentages than those who were ELI-positive or stage III (P = 0.002 and P < 0.001, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ELI-positive pT3 GC has a worse prognosis than its ELI-negative counterpart, comparable to that of pT4a. These findings suggest a need to revisit the pT grading system in GC.</p>","PeriodicalId":12684,"journal":{"name":"Gastric Cancer","volume":" ","pages":"862-871"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating peritoneal elastic laminal invasion to improve stratification of patients with pT3 gastric cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Daiki Terajima, Motohiro Kojima, Shingo Sakashita, Tetsuro Taki, Takahiro Kinoshita, Genichiro Ishii, Naoya Sakamoto\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10120-025-01627-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Elastic laminal invasion (ELI), defined as tumor invasion beyond the peritoneal elastic lamina, may affect gastric cancer (GC) prognosis, though limited data exist on this relationship.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed representative pathological slides from 396 patients with pT3 or pT4a GC who underwent curative resection to assess the association between ELI and relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 5-year RFS of pT3 GC with negative ELI was 85.9%, which was better than the 55.9% of that of ELI-positive pT3 (P < 0.001) or pT4a (51.3%) GC (P < 0.001). Similarly, the 5-year OS of ELI-negative pT3 GC was 90.4%, while the corresponding values for ELI-positive pT3 and pT4a were 67.0% (P < 0.001) and 63.6% (P < 0.001), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that the most significant prognostic factors for RFS were pT factors (i.e., pT3 with ELI/pT4), tumor size (≥ 80 mm), and nodal metastasis. We subdivided our cohort of patients with pathological stage II (pT3N0, pT3N1) GC into ELI-negative and ELI-positive subgroups, and found that the ELI-negative ones had better RFS percentages than those who were ELI-positive or stage III (P = 0.002 and P < 0.001, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ELI-positive pT3 GC has a worse prognosis than its ELI-negative counterpart, comparable to that of pT4a. These findings suggest a need to revisit the pT grading system in GC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastric Cancer\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"862-871\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastric Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-025-01627-5\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastric Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-025-01627-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:弹性层压侵袭(Elastic laminal invasion, ELI),定义为肿瘤侵袭腹膜弹性层外,可能影响胃癌(GC)的预后,但关于这种关系的资料有限。方法:我们回顾性回顾了396例pT3或pT4a胃癌患者的代表性病理切片,以评估ELI与无复发生存期(RFS)和总生存期(OS)之间的关系。结果:ELI阴性pT3 GC的5年RFS为85.9%,优于ELI阳性pT3的55.9% (P)。结论:ELI阳性pT3 GC的预后差于ELI阴性,与pT4a相当。这些发现表明需要重新审视GC中的pT分级系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating peritoneal elastic laminal invasion to improve stratification of patients with pT3 gastric cancer.

Background: Elastic laminal invasion (ELI), defined as tumor invasion beyond the peritoneal elastic lamina, may affect gastric cancer (GC) prognosis, though limited data exist on this relationship.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed representative pathological slides from 396 patients with pT3 or pT4a GC who underwent curative resection to assess the association between ELI and relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results: The 5-year RFS of pT3 GC with negative ELI was 85.9%, which was better than the 55.9% of that of ELI-positive pT3 (P < 0.001) or pT4a (51.3%) GC (P < 0.001). Similarly, the 5-year OS of ELI-negative pT3 GC was 90.4%, while the corresponding values for ELI-positive pT3 and pT4a were 67.0% (P < 0.001) and 63.6% (P < 0.001), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that the most significant prognostic factors for RFS were pT factors (i.e., pT3 with ELI/pT4), tumor size (≥ 80 mm), and nodal metastasis. We subdivided our cohort of patients with pathological stage II (pT3N0, pT3N1) GC into ELI-negative and ELI-positive subgroups, and found that the ELI-negative ones had better RFS percentages than those who were ELI-positive or stage III (P = 0.002 and P < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusions: ELI-positive pT3 GC has a worse prognosis than its ELI-negative counterpart, comparable to that of pT4a. These findings suggest a need to revisit the pT grading system in GC.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Gastric Cancer
Gastric Cancer 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
14.70
自引率
2.70%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Gastric Cancer is an esteemed global forum that focuses on various aspects of gastric cancer research, treatment, and biology worldwide. The journal promotes a diverse range of content, including original articles, case reports, short communications, and technical notes. It also welcomes Letters to the Editor discussing published articles or sharing viewpoints on gastric cancer topics. Review articles are predominantly sought after by the Editor, ensuring comprehensive coverage of the field. With a dedicated and knowledgeable editorial team, the journal is committed to providing exceptional support and ensuring high levels of author satisfaction. In fact, over 90% of published authors have expressed their intent to publish again in our esteemed journal.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信