4.7 Article

Stage-Stratified Prognosis of Signet Ring Cell Histology in Patients Undergoing Curative Resection for Gastric Adenocarcinoma

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 21, 期 5, 页码 1678-1685

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-013-3466-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P30 CA008748] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The prognosis of signet ring cell (SRC) gastric adenocarcinoma is regarded as poor, although studies addressing outcomes in relation to non-SRC tumors are conflicting. Our objective was to compare the survival of SRC tumors with stage-matched intestinal-type tumors in a cohort of Western patients. Review of a prospectively maintained database identified 569 patients undergoing curative resection (R0) from 1990 to 2009. Patients were divided into three histologic groups on the basis of the Lauren classification: SRC (n = 210), intestinal well- or moderately differentiated (WMD, n = 242) disease, and intestinal poorly differentiated (PD, n = 117) disease. Patient demographics, clinicopathologic features, and postoperative outcomes were determined. Stage-stratified disease-specific mortality was calculated and multivariate analysis performed. When compared with WMD and PD tumors, SRC tumors were associated with younger age (63 years SRC vs. 71 years WMD and 72 years PD, p < 0.0001) and with female sex (58 % SRC vs. 40 % WMD and 40 % PD, p = 0.0003). Median follow-up was 115 months. Patients with stage Ia SRC lesions had a better 5-year disease-specific mortality compared with stage-matched intestinal-type tumors (0 % SRC vs. 8 % WMD and 24 % PD, p = 0.001). In contrast, SRC patients with stage III disease fared significantly worse (78 % SRC vs. 54 % WMD and 72 % PD, p = 0.001). On multivariate analysis, the risk of death from gastric cancer comparing all three groups was lowest for SRC in stage I and highest for SRC in stage III disease (stage III hazard ratio: SRC 1 vs. 0.47 WMD and 0.85 PD). When compared with intestinal-type tumors, SRC tumors at early stages are not necessarily associated with poor outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据