Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Tumor Size as a Recommendable Variable for Accuracy of the Prognostic Prediction of Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis of 1,521 Patients

  • Gastrointestinal Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

It is still controversial whether tumor size (Ts) should be considered an important indicator for evaluation the prognosis of gastric cancer (GC). The purpose of this study was to elucidate the prognostic prediction superiority of Ts in the large-scale cohort of GC patients.

Methods

Data from 1,521 patients who underwent the curative resection were analyzed for demonstration the prognostic value of Ts. In addition, a tumor size-node-metastasis (TsNM) classification system was proposed to evaluate the comparative superiorities of the prognostic prediction of GC patients.

Results

With the univariate and multivariate analyses, Ts was identified as an independently prognostic predictor of GC patients, as was T stage. Ts was demonstrated to have smaller Akaike information criterion and Bayesian Information Criterion values within the Cox regression analyses than shown by T stage, which represented the optimum prognostic stratification. TsNM classification was also found to be competent for accurately prognostic evaluation of GC patients. The matched case–control logistic regression showed that TsNM classification could provide very powerful discriminations of patients’ overall survival, compared with TNM classification. Additionally, Ts stage was found to enhance the survival discriminations in patients with certain clinicopathological characteristics, including male gender, T4a stage, N0 stage, diffuse type of Lauren classification, or age ≤60 years.

Conclusions

Ts should be recommended as an important clinicopathologic variable to enhance the accuracy of the prognostic prediction of GC clinical patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chae S, Lee A, Lee JH. The effectiveness of the new (7th) UICC N classification in the prognosis evaluation of gastric cancer patients: A comparative study between the 5th/6th and 7th UICC N classification. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14:166–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sun Z, Zhu GL, Lu C, Guo PT, Huang BJ, Li K, et al. A novel subclassification of pT2 gastric cancers according to the depth of muscularis propria invasion: superficial muscularis propria versus deep muscularis propria/subserosa. Ann Surg. 2009;249:768–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yamaguchi N, Yanagawa T, Yoshimura T, Kohrogi N, Tanaka K, Nakamura Y, et al. Use of tumor diameter to estimate the growth kinetics of cancer and sensitivity of screening tests. Environ Health Perspect. 1990;87:63–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Plevritis SK. A mathematical algorithm that computes breast cancer sizes and doubling times detected by screening. Math Biosci. 2001;171:155–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Nakamura S, Fukui T, Taniguchi T, Usami N, Kawaguchi K, Ishiguro F, et al. Prognostic impact of tumor size eliminating the ground glass opacity component: modified clinical T descriptors of the tumor, node, metastasis classification of lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2013;8:1551–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schwab FD, Bürki N, Huang DJ, Heinzelmann-Schwarz V, Schmid SM, Vetter M, et al. Impact of breast cancer family history on tumor detection and tumor size in women newly-diagnosed with invasive breast cancer. Fam Cancer. 2014;13:99–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kang S, Kim YS, Choi HJ, Kim MH, Cho KS. Additional value of combined evaluation of tumor size with lymph node size in the detection of lymph node metastases in early-stage cervical cancer patients. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2013;37:572–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shields CL, Kaliki S, Furuta M, Fulco E, Alarcon C, Shields JA. American Joint Committee on Cancer classification of posterior uveal melanoma (tumor size category) predicts prognosis in 7731 patients. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:2066–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Claret L, Gupta M, Han K, Joshi A, Sarapa N, He J, et al. Evaluation of tumor-size response metrics to predict overall survival in Western and Chinese patients with first-line metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:2110–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chattopadhyay S, Cross P, Nayar A, Galaal K, Naik R. Tumor size: a better independent predictor of distant failure and death than depth of myometrial invasion in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I endometrioid endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23:690–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Süer E, Baltaci S, Burgu B, Aydoğdu Ö, Göğüş Ç. Significance of tumor size in renal cell cancer with perinephric fat infiltration: is TNM staging system adequate for predicting prognosis? Urol J. 2013;10:774–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Horvath LE, Werner T, Boucher K, Jones K. The relationship between tumor size and stage in early versus advanced ovarian cancer. Med Hypotheses. 2013;80:684–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Berretta R, Patrelli TS, Migliavacca C, Rolla M, Franchi L, Monica M, et al. Assessment of tumor size as a useful marker for the surgical staging of endometrial cancer. Oncol Rep. 2014;31:2407–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Huang CM, Xu M, Wang JB, Zheng CH, Li P, Xie JW, et al. Is tumor size a predictor of preoperative N staging in T2-T4a stage advanced gastric cancer? Surg Oncol. 2014;23:5–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lu J, Huang CM, Zheng CH, Li P, Xie JW, Wang JB, et al. Consideration of tumor size improves the accuracy of TNM predictions in patients with gastric cancer after curative gastrectomy. Surg Oncol. 2013;22:167–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Zu H, Wang F, Ma Y, Xue Y. Stage-stratified analysis of prognostic significance of tumor size in patients with gastric cancer. PLoS One. 2013;8:e54502.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Saito H, Osaki T, Murakami D, Sakamoto T, Kanaji S, Oro S, et al. Macroscopic tumor size as a simple prognostic indicator in patients with gastric cancer. Am J Surg. 2006;192:296–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang X, Wan F, Pan J, Yu GZ, Chen Y, Wang JJ. Tumor size: a non-neglectable independent prognostic factor for gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2008;97:236–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Liu X, Xu Y, Long Z, Zhu H, Wang Y. Prognostic significance of tumor size in T3 gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:1875–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Jun KH, Jung H, Baek JM, Chin HM, Park WB. Does tumor size have an impact on gastric cancer? A single institute experience. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2009;394:631–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bilici A, Uygun K, Seker M, Ustaalioglu BB, Aliustaoglu M, Temiz S, et al. The effect of tumor size on overall survival in patients with pT3 gastric cancer: experiences from 3 centers. Onkologie. 2010;33:676–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Quan J, Zhang R, Liang H, Li F, Liu H, Zhang H, et al. The impact of tumor size on survival of patients with pT4aN0M0 gastric cancer. Am Surg. 2013;79:328–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jaehne J, Meyer HJ, Maschek H, Geerlings H, Bruns E, Pichlmayr R. Lymphadenectomy in gastric adenocarcinoma: a prospective and prognostic study. Arch Surg. 1992;127:290–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Nakajima T. Gastric cancer treatment guidelines in Japan. Gastric Cancer. 2002;5:1–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Deng JY, Liang H, Sun D, Zhan HJ, Wang XN. The most appropriate category of metastatic lymph nodes to evaluate the overall survival of gastric cancer following curative resection. J Surg Oncol. 2008;98:343–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Smith DD, Schwarz RR, Schwartz RE. Impact of total lymph node count on staging and survival after gastrectomy for gastric cancer: data from a large US-Population Database. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7114–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nitsche U, Maak M, Schuster T, Künzli B, Langer R, Slotta-Huspenina J, et al. Prediction of prognosis is not improved by the seventh and latest edition of the TNM classification for colorectal cancer in a single-center collective. Ann Surg. 2011;254:793–800.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cho YK, Chung JW, Kim JK, Ahn YS, Kim MY, Park YO, et al. Comparison of 7 staging systems for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing transarterial chemoembolization. Cancer. 2008;112:352–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. World Health Organization. Fact Sheet No 297, Cancer. Feb 1, 2009.

  30. Maehara Y, Oiwa H, Oda S, Sakaguchi Y, Endo K, Ohno S, et al. Surgical treatment and prognosis for patients with gastric cancer lesions larger than 10 cm in size. Oncology. 1995;52:35–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Adachi Y, Oshiro T, Mori M, Maehara Y, Sugimachi K. Tumor size as a simple prognostic indicator for gastric carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 1997;4:137–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Shiu MH, Perrotti M, Brennan MF. Adenocarcinoma of the stomach: A multivariate analysis of clinical, pathologic and treatment factors. Hepatogastroenterology. 1989;36:7–12.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Maruyama K. The most important prognostic factors for gastric cancer patients: A study using univariate and multivariate analyses. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1987;22:63–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Deng J, Liang H, Wang DC, Sun D, Ding X, Pan Y, et al. Enhancement the prediction of postoperative survival in gastric cancer by combining the negative lymph node count with ratio between positive and examined lymph nodes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1043–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Yamamura Y, Nakajima T, Ohta K, Nashimoto A, Arai K, Hiratsuka M, et al. Determining prognostic factors for gastric cancer using the regression tree method. Gastric Cancer. 2002;5:201–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Shiraishi N, Sato K, Yasuda K, Inomata M, Kitano S. Multivariate Prognostic Study on Large Gastric Cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2007;96:14–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This study was supported in part by grants from the Anticancer Major Projects of Tianjin Municipal Science and Technology Commission 12ZCDZSY16400 and the National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) 2010CB529301.

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastric Cancer Surgery, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, City Key Laboratory of Tianjin Cancer Center, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Tianjin, China

    Jingyu Deng MD, Rupeng Zhang MD, Yuan Pan MD, Xuewei Ding MD, Mingzhi Cai MD, Yong Liu MD, Honggen Liu MD, Tao Bao MD, Xuguang Jiao MD, Xishan Hao MD & Han Liang MD

Authors
  1. Jingyu Deng MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rupeng Zhang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuan Pan MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xuewei Ding MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mingzhi Cai MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yong Liu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Honggen Liu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Tao Bao MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Xuguang Jiao MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Xishan Hao MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Han Liang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Han Liang MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Deng, J., Zhang, R., Pan, Y. et al. Tumor Size as a Recommendable Variable for Accuracy of the Prognostic Prediction of Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis of 1,521 Patients. Ann Surg Oncol 22, 565–572 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4014-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4014-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation