Development of the PERI-Gastric (PEritoneal Recurrence Index) and PERI-Gram (Peritoneal Recurrence Index NomoGRAM) for predicting the risk of metachronous peritoneal carcinomatosis after gastrectomy with curative intent for gastric cancer.
Gastric cancer
HIPEC
Nomogram
Peritoneal carcinomatosis
Journal
Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association
ISSN: 1436-3305
Titre abrégé: Gastric Cancer
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 100886238
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2022
05 2022
Historique:
received:
11
03
2021
accepted:
13
11
2021
pubmed:
24
11
2021
medline:
20
4
2022
entrez:
23
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A model that quantifies the risk of peritoneal recurrence would be a useful tool for improving decision-making in patients undergoing curative-aim gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC). Five Italian centers participated in this study. Two risk scores were created according to the two most widely used pathologic classifications of GC (the Lauren classification and the presence of signet-ring-cell features). The risk scores (the PERI-Gastric 1 and 2) were based on the results of multivariable logistic regressions and presented as nomograms (the PERI-Gram 1 and 2). Discrimination was assessed with the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating curves. Calibration graphs were constructed by plotting the actual versus the predicted rate of peritoneal recurrence. Internal validation was performed with a bootstrap resampling method (1000 iterations). The models were developed based on a population of 645 patients (selected from 1580 patients treated from 1998 to 2018). In the PERI-Gastric 1, significant variables were linitis plastica, stump GC, pT3-4, pN2-3 and the Lauren diffuse histotype, while in the PERI-Gastric 2, significant variables were linitis plastica, stump GC, pT3-4, pN2-3 and the presence of signet-ring cells. The AUC was 0,828 (0.778-0.877) for the PERI-Gastric 1 and 0,805 (0.755-0.855) for the PERI-Gastric 2. After bootstrap resampling, the PERI-Gastric 1 had a mean AUC of 0.775 (0.721-0.830) and a 95%CI estimate for the calibration slope of 0.852-1.505 and the PERI-Gastric 2 a mean AUC of 0.749 (0.693-0.805) and a 95%CI estimate for the slope of 0.777-1.351. The models are available at www.perigastric.org . We developed the PERI-Gastric and the PERI-Gram as instruments to determine the risk of peritoneal recurrence after curative-aim gastrectomy. These models could direct the administration of prophylactic intraperitoneal treatments.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
A model that quantifies the risk of peritoneal recurrence would be a useful tool for improving decision-making in patients undergoing curative-aim gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC).
METHODS
Five Italian centers participated in this study. Two risk scores were created according to the two most widely used pathologic classifications of GC (the Lauren classification and the presence of signet-ring-cell features). The risk scores (the PERI-Gastric 1 and 2) were based on the results of multivariable logistic regressions and presented as nomograms (the PERI-Gram 1 and 2). Discrimination was assessed with the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating curves. Calibration graphs were constructed by plotting the actual versus the predicted rate of peritoneal recurrence. Internal validation was performed with a bootstrap resampling method (1000 iterations).
RESULTS
The models were developed based on a population of 645 patients (selected from 1580 patients treated from 1998 to 2018). In the PERI-Gastric 1, significant variables were linitis plastica, stump GC, pT3-4, pN2-3 and the Lauren diffuse histotype, while in the PERI-Gastric 2, significant variables were linitis plastica, stump GC, pT3-4, pN2-3 and the presence of signet-ring cells. The AUC was 0,828 (0.778-0.877) for the PERI-Gastric 1 and 0,805 (0.755-0.855) for the PERI-Gastric 2. After bootstrap resampling, the PERI-Gastric 1 had a mean AUC of 0.775 (0.721-0.830) and a 95%CI estimate for the calibration slope of 0.852-1.505 and the PERI-Gastric 2 a mean AUC of 0.749 (0.693-0.805) and a 95%CI estimate for the slope of 0.777-1.351. The models are available at www.perigastric.org .
CONCLUSIONS
We developed the PERI-Gastric and the PERI-Gram as instruments to determine the risk of peritoneal recurrence after curative-aim gastrectomy. These models could direct the administration of prophylactic intraperitoneal treatments.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34811622
doi: 10.1007/s10120-021-01268-4
pii: 10.1007/s10120-021-01268-4
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
629-639Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to The International Gastric Cancer Association and The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association.
Références
D’Angelica M, Gonen M, Brennan MF, et al. Patterns of initial recurrence in completely resected gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2004;240(5):808–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000143245.28656.15 .
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000143245.28656.15
Liu D, Lu M, Li J, et al. The patterns and timing of recurrence after curative resection for gastric cancer in China. World J Surg Oncol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-1042-y .
doi: 10.1186/s12957-016-1042-y
Guner A, Yildirim R. Surgical management of metastatic gastric cancer: moving beyond the guidelines. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019. https://doi.org/10.21037/tgh.2019.08.03 .
doi: 10.21037/tgh.2019.08.03
Ikoma N, Chen HC, Wang X, et al. Patterns of initial recurrence in gastric adenocarcinoma in the era of preoperative therapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5838-y .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-017-5838-y
Spolverato G, Ejaz A, Kim Y, et al. Rates and patterns of recurrence after curative intent resection for gastric cancer: a United States multi-institutional analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.03.062 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.03.062
Wei J, Yang Y, Du J, et al. Peritoneal metastasis in relation to outcome and therapeutic strategy in gastric cancer. Transl Cancer Res. 2017. https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr.2017.01.13 .
doi: 10.21037/tcr.2017.01.13
Thomassen I, Van Gestel YR, Van Ramshorst B, et al. Peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin: a population-based study on incidence, survival and risk factors. Int J Cancer. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.28373 .
doi: 10.1002/ijc.28373
Lee JH, Son SY, Lee CM, et al. Factors predicting peritoneal recurrence in advanced gastric cancer: implication for adjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Gastric Cancer. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-013-0306-2 .
doi: 10.1007/s10120-013-0306-2
Agnes A, Biondi A, Laurino A, et al. A detailed analysis of the recurrence timing and pattern after curative surgery in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy or upfront surgery for gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.25959 .
doi: 10.1002/jso.25959
Seyfried F, von Rahden BH, Miras AD, et al. Incidence, time course and independent risk factors for metachronous peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin—a longitudinal experience from a prospectively collected database of 1108 patients. BMC Cancer. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-1081-8 .
doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1081-8
Coccolini F, Cotte E, Glehen O, et al. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer. Meta-analysis of randomized trials. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40(1):12–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2013.10.019 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.10.019
Desiderio J, Chao J, Melstrom L, et al. The 30-year experience—a meta-analysis of randomised and high-quality non-randomised studies of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of gastric cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2017;79:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.03.030 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.03.030
Marrelli D, Roviello F, De Manzoni G, et al. Different patterns of recurrence in gastric cancer depending on Lauren’s histological type: Longitudinal study. World J Surg. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-002-6344-2 .
doi: 10.1007/s00268-002-6344-2
Aoyama T, Yoshikawa T, Hayashi T, et al. Risk factors for peritoneal recurrence in stage II/III gastric cancer patients who received S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy after D2 gastrectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-2158-5 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-011-2158-5
Roviello F, Marrelli D, De Manzoni G, et al. Prospective study of peritoneal recurrence after curative surgery for gastric cancer. BJS. 2003. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4164 .
doi: 10.1002/bjs.4164
Kus T, Kose F, Aktas G, et al. Prediction of peritoneal recurrence in patients with gastric cancer: a multicenter study. J Gastrointest Cancer. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-020-00419-7 .
doi: 10.1007/s12029-020-00419-7
Moons KGM, Altman DG, Reitsma JB, et al. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2015. https://doi.org/10.7326/M14-0698 .
doi: 10.7326/M14-0698
Amin MB, Edge S, Greene F, et al. AJCC cancer staging manual Eighth edition. Springer Int Publ. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40618-3 .
Mariette C, Carneiro F, Grabsch HI, et al. Consensus on the pathological definition and classification of poorly cohesive gastric carcinoma. Gastric Cancer. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-018-0868-0 .
doi: 10.1007/s10120-018-0868-0
Charalampakis N, Nogueras González GM, Elimova E, et al. The proportion of signet ring cell component in patients with localized gastric adenocarcinoma correlates with the degree of response to pre-operative chemoradiation. Oncology. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1159/000443506 .
doi: 10.1159/000443506
Riley RD, Ensor J, Snell KIE, et al. Calculating the sample size required for developing a clinical prediction model. BMJ. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m441 .
doi: 10.1136/bmj.m441
Zlotnik A, Abraira V. A general-purpose nomogram generator for predictive logistic regression models. Stata J. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867x1501500212 .
doi: 10.1177/1536867x1501500212
Ensor J, Snell KI, Martin EC. PMCALPLOT: stata module to produce calibration plot of prediction model performance. Stat Softw Components. 2020.
Iasonos A, Schrag D, Raj GV, Panageas KS. How to build and interpret a nomogram for cancer prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(8):1364–70. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.12.9791 .
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.12.9791
Nattino G, Lemeshow S, Phillips G, et al. Assessing the calibration of dichotomous outcome models with the calibration belt. Stata J. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X1801700414 .
doi: 10.1177/1536867X1801700414
Kodera Y, Nakanishi H, Ito S, et al. Detection of disseminated cancer cells in linitis plastica-type gastric carcinoma. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyh097 .
doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyh097
Ikoma N, Blum M, Chiang YJ, et al. Yield of staging laparoscopy and lavage cytology for radiologically occult peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5409-7 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-016-5409-7
Tran TB, Hatzaras I, Worhunsky DJ, et al. Gastric remnant cancer: a distinct entity or simply another proximal gastric cancer? J Surg Oncol. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24080 .
doi: 10.1002/jso.24080
Shimada H, Fukagawa T, Haga Y, Oba K. Does remnant gastric cancer really differ from primary gastric cancer? A systematic review of the literature by the Task Force of Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Gastric Cancer. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-015-0582-0 .
doi: 10.1007/s10120-015-0582-0
Chen QY, Zhong Q, Zhou JF, et al. Conditional survival and recurrence of remnant gastric cancer after surgical resection: a multi-institutional study. Cancer Sci. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1111/cas.14231 .
doi: 10.1111/cas.14231
Yonemura Y, Sugiyama K, Fujimura T, et al. A new surgical technique (left upper abdominal evisceration) for advanced carcinoma of the gastric stump. Hepatogastroenterology. 1994.
Takebayashi K, Murata S, Yamamoto H, et al. Surgery-induced peritoneal cancer cells in patients who have undergone curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3525-9 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-3525-9
Naffouje SA, O’Donoghue C, Salti GI. Evaluation of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in a community setting: a cost-utility analysis of a hospital’s initial experience and reflections on the health care system. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113(5):544–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24162 .
doi: 10.1002/jso.24162
Ajani J, D’Amico T, Bentrem D, et al. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology gastric cancer—Version 4.2021. 2021. https://www.nccn.org/ .
Smyth EC, Verheij M, Allum W, et al. Gastric cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw350 .
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw350
Sautner T, Hofbauer F, Depisch D, et al. Adjuvant intraperitoneal cisplatin chemotherapy does not improve long-term survival after surgery for advanced gastric cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1994. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1994.12.5.970 .
doi: 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.5.970
Rosen HR, Jatzko G, Repse S, et al. Adjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy with carbon-adsorbed mitomycin in patients with gastric cancer: results of a randomized multicenter trial of the Austrian Working Group for Surgical Oncology. J Clin Oncol. 1998. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1998.16.8.2733 .
doi: 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.8.2733
Fujimoto S, Takahashi M, Mutou T, et al. Successful intraperitoneal hyperthermic chemoperfusion for the prevention of postoperative peritoneal recurrence in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma. Cancer. 1999. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990201)85:3%3c529::AID-CNCR3%3e3.0.CO;2-9 .
doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990201)85:3<529::AID-CNCR3>3.0.CO;2-9
Yonemura Y, De Aretxabala X, Fujimura T, et al. Intraoperative chemohyperthermic peritoneal perfusion as an adjuvant to gastric cancer: final results of a randomized controlled study. Hepatogastroenterology. 2001.
Beeharry MK, Zhu Z-L, Liu W-T, et al. Prophylactic HIPEC with radical D2 gastrectomy improves survival and peritoneal recurrence rates for locally advanced gastric cancer: personal experience from a randomized case control study. BMC Cancer. 2019;19:932. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-6125-z .
doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-6125-z
Glehen O, Passot G, Villeneuve L, et al. GASTRICHIP: D2 resection and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric carcinoma: a randomized and multicenter phase III study. BMC Cancer. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-183 .
doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-14-183
Prophylactic Surgery Plus HIPEC With CO
Lagast N, Carlier C, Ceelen WP. Pharmacokinetics and tissue transport of intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soc.2018.02.003 .
doi: 10.1016/j.soc.2018.02.003
Spolverato G, et al. Rates and patterns of recurrence after curative intent resection for gastric cancer: a united states multi-institutional analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;219(4):664–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.03.062 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.03.062
Roviello F, Marrelli D, de Manzoni G, Morgagni P, Di Leo A, Saragoni L, De Stefano A. Prospective study of peritoneal recurrence after curative surgery for gastric cancer. Br J Surg. 2003;90(9):1113–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4164 .
doi: 10.1002/bjs.4164
Makino T, Fujiwara Y, Takiguchi S, et al. Preoperative T staging of gastric cancer by multi-detector row computed tomography. Surgery. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2010.12.003 .
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2010.12.003
Chao Y, Zhu ZG, Yan M, et al. Value of multidetector-row computed tomography in the preoperative T and N staging of gastric carcinoma: a large-scale Chinese study. J Surg Oncol. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.21316 .
doi: 10.1002/jso.21316
Vergadis C, Schizas D. Is accurate N-staging for gastric cancer possible? Front Surg. 2018;5:41. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2018.00041 .
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2018.00041
Fukagawa T. Role of staging laparoscopy for gastric cancer patients. Ann Gastroenterol Surg. 2019;3(5):496–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12283 .
doi: 10.1002/ags3.12283
Zhang XP, Wang ZL, Tang L, Sun YS, Cao K, Gao Y. Support vector machine model for diagnosis of lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer with multidetector computed tomography: a preliminary study. BMC Cancer. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-11-10 .
doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-11-10
Yepuri N, Bahary N, Jain A, Dhir M. Review and update on the role of peritoneal cytology in the treatment of gastric cancer. J Surg Res. 2019;235:607–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.10.049 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.10.049
McMullen JRW, Selleck M, Wall NR, Senthil M. Peritoneal carcinomatosis: limits of diagnosis and the case for liquid biopsy. Oncotarget. 2017;8:43481–90. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.16480 .
doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.16480
Jamel S, Markar SR, Malietzis G, Acharya A, Athanasiou T, Hanna GB. Prognostic significance of peritoneal lavage cytology in staging gastric cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastric Cancer. 2018;21(1):10–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-017-0749-y .
doi: 10.1007/s10120-017-0749-y
Gęca K, Rawicz-Pruszyński K, Mielko J, et al. Rapid detection of free cancer cells in intraoperative peritoneal lavage using one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) in gastric cancer patients. Cells. 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells9102168 .
doi: 10.3390/cells9102168
Jagric T, Potrc S, Mis K, et al. Flow cytometry as the new “gold standard” for detection of free tumour cells in abdominal lavage fluid in gastric cancer patients: a comparative study of molecular and conventional methods. Surg Pract. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-1633.12173 .
doi: 10.1111/1744-1633.12173
Balachandran VP, Gonen M, Smith JJ, DeMatteo RP. Nomograms in oncology: more than meets the eye. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(4):e173–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71116-7 .
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71116-7