Metastatic lymph node ratio as an important prognostic factor in advanced gallbladder carcinoma with at least 6 lymph nodes retrieved.


Journal

Langenbeck's archives of surgery
ISSN: 1435-2451
Titre abrégé: Langenbecks Arch Surg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9808285

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
28 Sep 2023
Historique:
received: 16 07 2023
accepted: 21 09 2023
medline: 2 10 2023
pubmed: 29 9 2023
entrez: 28 9 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The metastatic lymph node (LN) ratio (LNR) has shown to be an important prognostic factor in various gastrointestinal malignancies. Nevertheless, the prognostic significance of LNR in gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) remains to be determined. From January 2007 to January 2018, 144 advanced GBC patients (T2-4 stages) who underwent curative surgery with at least 6 LNs retrieved were enrolled. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was performed to identify the optimal cut-off value for LNR. The clinicopathological features stratified by LNR level were analyzed. Meanwhile, univariate and multivariate Cox regression proportional hazard models were performed to identify risk factors for overall survival (OS). The optimal cut-off point for LNR was 0.28 according to the ROC curve. LNR>0.28 was associated with higher rate of D2 LN dissection (P=0.004) and higher tumor stages (P<0.001). Extent of liver resection, extrahepatic bile duct resection, tumor stage, LNR, margin status, tumor differentiation, and perineural invasion were associated with OS in univariate analysis (all P<0.05). GBC patients with LNR≤0.28 had a significantly longer median OS compared to those with LNR>0.28 (27.5 vs 18 months, P=0.004). Multivariate analysis indicated that tumor stage (T2 vs T3/T4; hazard ratio (HR) 1.596; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.195-2.132), LNR (≤0.28 vs >0.28; HR 0.666; 95% CI 0.463-0.958), margin status (R0 vs R1; HR 1.828; 95% CI 1.148-2.910), and tumor differentiation (poorly vs well/moderately; HR 0.670; 95% CI 0.589-0.892) were independent prognostic factors for GBC (all P<0.05). LNR is correlated to advanced GBC prognosis and is a potential prognostic factor for advanced GBC with at least 6 LNs retrieved.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The metastatic lymph node (LN) ratio (LNR) has shown to be an important prognostic factor in various gastrointestinal malignancies. Nevertheless, the prognostic significance of LNR in gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) remains to be determined.
METHODS METHODS
From January 2007 to January 2018, 144 advanced GBC patients (T2-4 stages) who underwent curative surgery with at least 6 LNs retrieved were enrolled. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was performed to identify the optimal cut-off value for LNR. The clinicopathological features stratified by LNR level were analyzed. Meanwhile, univariate and multivariate Cox regression proportional hazard models were performed to identify risk factors for overall survival (OS).
RESULTS RESULTS
The optimal cut-off point for LNR was 0.28 according to the ROC curve. LNR>0.28 was associated with higher rate of D2 LN dissection (P=0.004) and higher tumor stages (P<0.001). Extent of liver resection, extrahepatic bile duct resection, tumor stage, LNR, margin status, tumor differentiation, and perineural invasion were associated with OS in univariate analysis (all P<0.05). GBC patients with LNR≤0.28 had a significantly longer median OS compared to those with LNR>0.28 (27.5 vs 18 months, P=0.004). Multivariate analysis indicated that tumor stage (T2 vs T3/T4; hazard ratio (HR) 1.596; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.195-2.132), LNR (≤0.28 vs >0.28; HR 0.666; 95% CI 0.463-0.958), margin status (R0 vs R1; HR 1.828; 95% CI 1.148-2.910), and tumor differentiation (poorly vs well/moderately; HR 0.670; 95% CI 0.589-0.892) were independent prognostic factors for GBC (all P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
LNR is correlated to advanced GBC prognosis and is a potential prognostic factor for advanced GBC with at least 6 LNs retrieved.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37770780
doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-03119-5
pii: 10.1007/s00423-023-03119-5
pmc: PMC10539180
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

382

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

World J Surg Oncol. 2018 Sep 13;16(1):186
pubmed: 30213260
Int J Surg. 2022 Feb;98:106234
pubmed: 35074510
Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Jul;17(7):1831-40
pubmed: 20077022
Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2007 Jan;16(1):221-32
pubmed: 17336245
Surg Endosc. 2021 May;35(5):2223-2228
pubmed: 32430521
Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2019 Aug;43(4):e61-e62
pubmed: 30737024
Cancer Manag Res. 2021 Jun 10;13:4647-4655
pubmed: 34140810
World J Gastroenterol. 2018 Jul 14;24(26):2886-2892
pubmed: 30018483
Indian J Surg Oncol. 2019 Mar;10(1):50-54
pubmed: 30948872
World J Surg Oncol. 2019 Jan 7;17(1):8
pubmed: 30616645
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2013 May-Jun;47(5):443-8
pubmed: 23188077
J Gastrointest Oncol. 2015 Oct;6(5):452-8
pubmed: 26487937
World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Aug 21;19(31):5150-8
pubmed: 23964151
Biosci Trends. 2020 Nov 4;14(5):328-341
pubmed: 32830166
CA Cancer J Clin. 2023 Jan;73(1):17-48
pubmed: 36633525
Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;23(9):3016-23
pubmed: 27150440
JAMA Surg. 2022 May 1;157(5):446-454
pubmed: 35319717
Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Mar;22(3):811-8
pubmed: 25201500
World J Surg Oncol. 2012 May 17;10:87
pubmed: 22594526
Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf). 2019 May 25;7(6):426-433
pubmed: 31857904
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 May;95(22):e3675
pubmed: 27258495
J Korean Surg Soc. 2013 Mar;84(3):168-77
pubmed: 23487246
HPB (Oxford). 2015 Aug;17(8):681-90
pubmed: 26172135
J Gastrointest Surg. 2023 Jul;27(7):1387-1399
pubmed: 37095334
Ann Surg. 2011 Aug;254(2):320-5
pubmed: 21617582
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;42(9):1253-60
pubmed: 27017273
BMC Cancer. 2020 Aug 31;20(1):828
pubmed: 32867722
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2022 Nov;48(11):2315-2322
pubmed: 34802862
J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Jun;15(6):1017-25
pubmed: 21487831
J Surg Oncol. 2019 Jun;119(8):1099-1107
pubmed: 30864246
Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Dec;28(13):8142-8151
pubmed: 34532819
CA Cancer J Clin. 2017 Mar;67(2):93-99
pubmed: 28094848

Auteurs

Junke Wang (J)

Division of Biliary Tract Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.

Fei Liu (F)

Division of Biliary Tract Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.

Wenjie Ma (W)

Division of Biliary Tract Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.

Haijie Hu (H)

Division of Biliary Tract Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.

Fuyu Li (F)

Division of Biliary Tract Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. lfy_74@hotmail.com.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH