Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Is Pretreatment Endoscopic Biopsy a Good Predictor of Signet Ring Cell Histology in Gastric Carcinoma?

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Signet ring cell (SRC) carcinoma is defined as an adenocarcinoma in which >50% of the total operative specimen consists of isolated or small groups of malignant cells containing intracytoplasmic mucins (hSRCs). We previously demonstrated that hSRCs are a predictor of poor prognosis with specific tumoral characteristics suggesting the need for a dedicated therapeutic strategy before surgery. However diagnostic accuracy and prognostic value of SRCs on pretreatment biopsies (bSRCs) is unknown. The aim of the study was to determine if bSRCs can accurately predict hSRCs and survival.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed among 254 patients with an adenocarcinoma. We performed pretreatment endoscopic biopsies and histopathologic analysis of the surgical specimen. Pretreatment endoscopic biopsy results were compared with definitive pathologic results and were correlated with long-term survival.

Results

From 254 patients enrolled, 96 had bSRCs (37.8%), and 101 (39.8%) had hSRCs. Pretreatment biopsy results were correct in 89 of 101 patients with hSRC (sensitivity 88.1%) and in 146 of 153 with histologic non-SRCs (hNSRCs) (specificity 95.4%). The positive and negative predictive values for the biopsies were 92.7, and 92.4%, respectively, with an overall accuracy of 92.5%. When compared to the biopsy results, non-SRCs (bNSRCs), bSRCs were associated with poorer survival and were identified as an independent factor for poor prognosis (hazard ratio 1.89 with 95% confidence interval 1.35 to 2.64, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The presence of signet ring cells in samples obtained from routine pretreatment endoscopic biopsies accurately predicts SRC histology and poor prognosis. The specific therapeutic strategy can consequently be considered from the initial diagnosis.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Palli D, Bianchi S, Cipriani F et al (1991) Reproducibility of histologic classification of gastric cancer. Br J Cancer 63:765–768

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lauren P (1965) The two histological main types of gastric carcinoma: diffuse and so-called intestinal-type carcinoma: an attempt at a histo-clinical classification. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand 64:31–49

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Watanabe H, Jass JR, Sobin LH (1990) Histological typing of oesophageal and gastric tumours. In: WHO International Histological Classification of Tumors. 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, Berlin

  4. Flucke U, Mönig SP, Baldus SE et al (2002) Differences between biopsy- or specimen-related Laurén and world health organization classification in gastric cancer. World J Surg 26:137–140. doi:10.1007/s00268-001-0195-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Alberts SR, Cervantes A, van de Velde CJ (2003) Gastric cancer: epidemiology, pathology and treatment. Ann Oncol 14(2):31–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dicken BJ, Graham K, Hamilton SM et al (2006) Lymphovascular invasion is associated with poor survival in gastric cancer: an application of gene-expression and tissue array techniques. Ann Surg 243:64–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Clark CJ, Thirlby RC, Picozzi V Jr et al (2006) Current problems in surgery: gastric cancer. Curr Probl Surg 43:566–670

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Henson DE, Dittus C, Younes M et al (2004) 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 128:765–770

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wu H, Rusiecki JA, Zhu K et al (2009) Stomach carcinoma incidence patterns in the United States by histologic type and anatomic site. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 18:1945–1952

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cunningham SC, Kamangar F, Kim MP et al (2005) Survival after gastric adenocarcinoma resection: eighteen-year experience at a single institution. J Gastrointest Surg 9:718–725

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Piessen G, Messager M, Leteurtre E et al (2009) Signet ring cell histology is an independent predictor of poor prognosis in gastric adenocarcinoma regardless of tumoral clinical presentation. Ann Surg 250:878–887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Messager M, Lefevre J, Pichot-Delahaye V et al (2011) Impact of perioperative chemotherapy on survival in patients with gastric signet ring cell adenocarcinoma: a multicentric comparative study. Ann Surg 254:684–693

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Adachi Y, Yasuda K, Inomata M et al (2000) Pathology and prognosis of gastric carcinoma: well versus poorly differentiated type. Cancer 89:1418–1424

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Li C, Kim S, Lai JF et al (2007) Advanced gastric carcinoma with signet ring cell histology. Oncology 72:64–68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rougier P, Ducreux M, Mahjoubi M et al (1994) Efficacy of combined 5-fluorouracil and cisplatinum in advanced gastric carcinomas: a phase II trial with prognostic factor analysis. Eur J Cancer 30A:1263–1269

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Takiuchi H, Hirata I, Kawabe S et al (2000) Immunohistochemical expression of vascular endothelial growth factor can predict response to 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. Oncol Rep 7:841–846

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mac Donald JS, Benedetti J, Smalley S et al (2009) Chemoradiation of resected gastric cancer: a 10-year follow-up of the phase III trial INT0116 (SWOG 9008). J Clin Oncol 27(Suppl):15S (abstract 4515)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Botet JF, Lightdale CJ, Zauber AG et al (1991) Preoperative staging of gastric cancer: comparison of endoscopic US and dynamic CT. Radiology 181:426–432

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Dittler HJ, Siewert JR (1993) Role of endoscopic ultrasonography in gastric carcinoma. Endoscopy 25:162–166

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Macdonald JS, Smalley SR, Benedetti J et al (2001) Chemoradiotherapy after surgery compared with surgery alone for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. N Engl J Med 345:725–730

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP et al (2006) Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 355:11–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sobin LH, Wittekind C (eds) (2002) UICC TNM classification of malignant tumours, 6th edn. Wiley-Liss, New York

    Google Scholar 

  23. Bamba M, Sugihara H, Kushima R et al (2001) Time-dependent expression of intestinal phenotype in signet ring cell carcinomas of the human stomach. Virchows Arch 438:49–56

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Peng DF, Sugihara H, Mukaisho K et al (2004) Genetic lineage of poorly differentiated gastric carcinoma with a tubular component analysed by comparative genomic hybridization. J Pathol 203:884–895

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Tong JH, Sun Z, Wang ZN et al (2011) Early gastric cancer with signet-ring cell histologic type: risk factors of lymph node metastasis and indications of endoscopic surgery. Surgery 149:356–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hansson LE, Lindgren A, Nyrén O (1996) Can endoscopic biopsy specimens be used for reliable Laurén classification of gastric cancer? Scand J Gastroenterol 31:711–715

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Shibata A, Longacre TA, Puligandla B et al (2001) Histological classification of gastric adenocarcinoma for epidemiological research: concordance between pathologists. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10:75–78

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Jónasson L, Hallgrímsson J, Olafsdóttir G (1994) Gastric carcinoma: correlation of diagnosis based on biopsies and resection specimens with reference to the Laurén classification. APMIS 102:711–715

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chirieac LR, Swisher SG, Correa AM et al (2005) Signet-ring cell or mucinous histology after preoperative chemoradiation and survival in patients with esophageal or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 11:2229–2236

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Kunisaki C, Shimada H, Nomura M et al (2004) Therapeutic strategy for signet ring cell carcinoma of the stomach. Br J Surg 91:1319–1324

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Smith BR, Stabile BE (2009) Extreme aggressiveness and lethality of gastric adenocarcinoma in the very young. Arch Surg 144:506–510

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Baiocchi GL, Tiberio GA, Minicozzi AM et al (2010) Multicentric Western analysis of prognostic factors in advanced, node-negative gastric cancer patients. Ann Surg 252:70–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Fang WL, Wu CW, Lo SS et al (2009) Mucin-producing gastric cancer: clinicopathological difference between signet ring cell carcinoma and mucinous carcinoma. Hepatogastroenterology 56:1227–1231

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Graham DY, Schwartz JT, Cain GD et al (1982) Prospective evaluation of biopsy number in the diagnosis of esophageal and gastric carcinoma. Gastroenterology 82:228–231

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Lal N, Bhasin DK, Malik AK et al (1992) Optimal number of biopsy specimens in the diagnosis of carcinoma of the oesophagus. Gut 33:724–726

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Digestive and Oncological Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille, University Hospital Claude Huriez, Place de Verdun, 59037, Lille cedex, France

    Guillaume Piessen, David Amielh, Mathieu Messager, Edouard Vinatier, Jean Pierre Triboulet & Christophe Mariette

  2. University of Lille, Nord de France, Lille, France

    Guillaume Piessen, David Amielh, Mathieu Messager, Emmanuelle Leteurtre & Christophe Mariette

  3. Department of Pathology, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille, Lille, France

    Emmanuelle Leteurtre

Authors
  1. Guillaume Piessen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Amielh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mathieu Messager
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Edouard Vinatier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Emmanuelle Leteurtre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jean Pierre Triboulet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Christophe Mariette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guillaume Piessen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Piessen, G., Amielh, D., Messager, M. et al. Is Pretreatment Endoscopic Biopsy a Good Predictor of Signet Ring Cell Histology in Gastric Carcinoma?. World J Surg 36, 346–354 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1351-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1351-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation