Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 15  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 298-304

Prospective and prognostic factors for hepatic metastasis of gastric carcinoma: A retrospective analysis


Department of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Zhongshan, Dalian, Liaoning Province, China

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Xiao Lei Ding
Department of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Zhongshan, Road No. 467, Shahekou District, Dalian 116027, Liaoning Province
China
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_576_17

Rights and Permissions

Aims: The aim of the study was to prospectively explore the prognostic factor for gastric cancer with liver metastasis (GCLM), since no prognostic factor was reported to be consistently significant across studies. Patients and Methods: One hundred and five patients with GCLM treated at our center between January 1, 2010, and March 31, 2016, were included and their clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. The univariate analyses were first applied for identify the potential independent prognostic and predictive factors for liver metastasis. These factors were further evaluated with Cox proportional-hazard regression model testing. Finally, survival curves were estimated. Results: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score, number of other distant metastases, levels of cancer antigen (CA), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were independent prognostic factors (adjusted relative risk [RR]: 1.362–2.887; P = 0.000–0.027). The survival of patients who received radical gastrectomy would be associated with the ECOG score, staging (T stage and N stage), CA 19-9, and CEA levels (RR: 2.169–3.787; P = 0.000–0.027). Patients with following indicators 1 month postoperatively were prone to liver metastasis after radical gastrectomy (median, 6.9–12.03 months; P = 0.007–0.042): Venous/lymphatic invasion, pathological Stage IV (especially combined with T4 stage), intestinal Lauren type, and combined elevation of CEA and CA 19-9 levels. Conclusions: The therapy design for patients with GCLM should consider the general conditions and personal clinicopathological characters of patients. After balancing the benefit and risk factors, multidisciplinary treatment and individual treatment should be developed based on evidence-based medicine model for each patient.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed257    
    Printed14    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded17    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal