scholarly journals Prognostic Factors and Recurrence Pattern of Far-advanced Gastric Cancer with Pathologicallypositive Para-aortic Lymph Nodes

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (7) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Recurrence Pattern

Prognostic factors and recurrence pattern in node-negative advanced gastric cancer

2013 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 136-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
I.S. Lee ◽  
J.H. Yook ◽  
T.H. Kim ◽  
H.S. Kim ◽  
K.C. Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Recurrence Pattern ◽  
Node Negative

scholarly journals Prognostic value of fibrosis ratio in metastatic lymph nodes of node-positive advanced gastric cancer

Medicine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 97 (3) ◽  
pp. e9703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soon Auck Hong ◽  
Myoung Won Son ◽  
Junhun Cho ◽  
Chung Hun Lee ◽  
Si-Hyeong Jang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Metastatic Lymph Nodes ◽  
Node Positive ◽  
Metastatic Lymph

scholarly journals Which method is more suitable for advanced gastric cancer with enlarged lymph nodes, laparoscopic radical gastrectomy or open gastrectomy?

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 853-863
Author(s):  
Qi-Yue Chen ◽  
Chao-Hui Zheng ◽  
Ping Li ◽  
Jian-Wei Xie ◽  
Jia-Bin Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Open Gastrectomy ◽  
Radical Gastrectomy

scholarly journals Prognostic Significance of Serum Uric Acid and Gamma-Glutamyltransferase in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shanshan Yang ◽  
Xinjia He ◽  
Ying Liu ◽  
Xiao Ding ◽  
Haiping Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Uric Acid ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Serum Uric Acid ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
Gamma Glutamyltransferase ◽  
Gastric Cancer Patients

Purpose. In this study, we aim to evaluate the prognostic role of serum uric acid and gamma-glutamyltransferase in advanced gastric cancer patients. Methods. A total of 180 patients pathologically diagnosed with advanced gastric cancer were included in this retrospective study. We used time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to identify the optimal cut-off value of serum uric acid (UA) and gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT). Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test, and multivariate Cox regression analyses were applied. A nomogram was formulated, and the calibration and discrimination of the nomogram were determined by calibration curve and concordance index (C-index). We validated the results using bootstrap resampling and a separate study on 60 patients collected from 2015 to 2017 using the same criteria in other medical center. Results. Both higher serum uric acid (>228 μmol/L) and higher gamma-glutamyltransferase (>14 U/L) had worse OS and PFS. Univariate analysis indicated that serum uric acid (UA) (p<0.001 and p<0.001) and gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) (p<0.001 and p=0.044) were significantly related to overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed serum uric acid (UA) and gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) were independent prognostic factors for OS (p=0.012, p=0.001). The optimal agreement between actual observation and nomogram prediction was shown by calibration curves. The C-indexes of the nomogram for predicting OS and PFS were 0.748 (95% CI: 0.70-0.79) and 0.728 (95% CI: 0.6741-0.7819), respectively. The results were confirmed in the validation cohort. Conclusion. We observed that both serum UA and GGT were poor prognostic factors in patients with advanced gastric cancer. And we also formulated and validated a nomogram which can predict individual survival for advanced gastric cancer patients.

Survival analysis of treatment with S-1, alone or in combination with CDDP (SP), in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer: A 10-year retrospective cohort study.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15170-e15170
Author(s):  
Akitaka Makiyama ◽  
Tatsuhiro Kajitani ◽  
Hisanobu Oda ◽  
Chinatsu Fujimoto ◽  
Taito Esaki
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Metastatic Site ◽  
Gastric Cancer Patients

e15170 Background: In Japan, the elderly population is increasing, and steadily increase the number of deaths in the elderly gastric cancer patients. However, the standard treatment of elderly gastric cancer has not been established, either treatment of S-1 or SP is carried out in the clinical practice, while SP is considered as standard therapy in the young people. Now, we investigated the impact of S-1 and SP on survival time in clinical practice. Methods: Between 2003 and 2012, advanced gastric cancer patients over 70 years of age received S-1 or SP as first line therapy were retrospectively reviewed to investigate clinical outcomes. Patient characteristics analyzed included age, gender, performance status (PS), tumor histology, renal function and metastatic site. In addition, we have analyzed prognostic factors in multivariate analysis. Results: Among 93 patients (pts), 67 pts (72%) received S-1 and 26 pts (28%) received SP. Patient characteristics between the two groups showed no significant differences in gender, histology, metastatic site, or creatinine clearance level, but did show an imbalance in PS (tended with better at SP group) and age (tended with younger at SP group), significantly. Even though the background factors were favorable results in SP group, there were no significant differences in median progression-free survival (median 139 vs. 102 days; p = 0.96) and overall survival (median 330 vs. 263 days; p = 0.55) between S-1 and SP group, respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia (10 vs. 27%, p < 0.05) , fatigue (3 vs. 15%, p < 0.05) and Grade 1-2 creatinine increased (9 vs. 31%, p < 0.01) were more frequent in the SP group than in the S-1 group, respectively. According to the multivariate analysis, exposure to CDDP was not independently associated with a better prognosis. Conclusions: Despite the obvious limitations of this analysis, there does not appear to be a benefit for the addition of CDDP in the elderly gastric cancer patients due to the increase of toxicity. A randomized controlled trial in this age group is warranted. We will also report the results of clinically meaningful prognostic factors associated with the primary treatment at annual meeting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document