Abstract
Objective
The objective of this paper is to study demographic characteristics of different histological types with patient's gender, age, and tumor location in gastric cancer.
Methods
Three hundred and fifty-one patients who had gastric cancer and undergone a D2 or greater gastrectomy were analyzed retrospectively. The association between gender and age, tumor location and histological types, including tubular adenocarcinoma (TUB), poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma (POR), signet-ring cell carcinoma (SIG), mucinous adenocarcinoma, and undifferentiated carcinoma (UND), were analyzed by chi-square test or Fisher exact test.
Results
The proportion of TUB in males was higher than that in females (52.4% vs 30.1%, p value of 0.000), and the proportion of SIG in females was higher than that in males (26.2% vs 12.9%, p = 0.002). The prevalence of TUB in patients aged >60 years (54.9%) was significantly higher than that in patients aged 40–60 years (42.2%) and <40 years (24.1%). The prevalence of SIG in the group aged <40 years was significantly higher than that in the other two age groups (44.8% vs 15.6%, 12.7%, p = 0.000). Among the three age groups, the proportion of UND was highest in patients aged 40–60 years (7.8% vs 0%, 1.4%, p = 0.012). The proportion of TUB was highest in the upper part of the stomach as compared to the middle and lower parts of the stomach (56.1% vs 30.8%, 48.2%, p = 0.016). POR was commonly found in the middle part of the stomach as compared to the upper and lower parts (44.6% vs 26.1%, 14.6%, p = 0.002).
Conclusion
TUB was commonly found in the upper part of the stomach in old, male patients, and SIG was the most common histological type in young, female patients. UND was common in middle-aged patients, and POR was mainly found in the middle part of the stomach.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Japanese Gastric Cancer A. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma—2nd English Edition. Gastric Cancer. 1998;1:10–24.
Munson JL, O'Mahony R. Radical gastrectomy for cancer of the stomach. Surg Clin North Am. 2005;85:1021–32, vii.
Henson DE, Dittus C, Younes M, et al. Differential trends in the intestinal and diffuse types of gastric carcinoma in the United States, 1973–2000: increase in the signet ring cell type. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2004;128:765–70.
Kunisaki C, Akiyama H, Nomura M, et al. Comparison of surgical outcomes of gastric cancer in elderly and middle-aged patients. Am J Surg. 2006;191:216–24.
Otsuji E, Yamaguchi T, Sawai K, et al. Characterization of signet ring cell carcinoma of the stomach. J Surg Oncol. 1998;67:216–20.
Kim DY, Joo JK, Ryu SY, et al. Clinicopathologic characteristics of gastric carcinoma in elderly patients: a comparison with young patients. World J Gastroenterol. 2005;11:22–6.
Kawamura H, Kondo Y, Osawa S, et al. A clinicopathologic study of mucinous adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Gastric Cancer. 2001;4:83–6.
Yao JC, Tseng JF, Worah S, et al. Clinicopathologic behavior of gastric adenocarcinoma in Hispanic patients: analysis of a single institution's experience over 15 years. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3094–103.
Kaneko S, Yoshimura T. Time trend analysis of gastric cancer incidence in Japan by histological types, 1975–1989. Br J Cancer. 2001;84:400–5.
Adachi Y, Yasuda K, Inomata M, et al. Pathology and prognosis of gastric carcinoma: well versus poorly differentiated type. Cancer. 2000;89:1418–24.
Maruyama M, Takeshita K, Endo M, et al. Clinicopathological study of gastric carcinoma in high- and low-mortality countries: comparison between Japan and the United States. Gastric Cancer. 1998;1:64–70.
Haruta H, Hosoya Y, Sakuma K, et al. Clinicopathological study of lymph-node metastasis in 1,389 patients with early gastric cancer: assessment of indications for endoscopic resection. J Dig Dis. 2008;9:213–8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yu, J., Zhao, Q. The Demographic Characteristics of Histological Types of Gastric Cancer with Gender, Age, and Tumor Location. J Gastrointest Canc 40, 98–100 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-009-9107-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-009-9107-6