Advertisement

Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 20, Issue 5, pp 1598–1603 | Cite as

The Impact of Preoperative Lymph Node Size on Long-Term Outcome Following Curative Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

  • Masanori TokunagaEmail author
  • Norihiko Sugisawa
  • Yutaka Tanizawa
  • Etsuro Bando
  • Taiichi Kawamura
  • Masanori Terashima
Gastrointestinal Oncology

Abstract

Background

Multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) is widely used to predict pathological nodal status. However, an appropriate nodal size cutoff value to predict pathological nodal status has not been determined, and the impact of preoperative lymph node size on long-term outcomes is unclear.

Methods

This study included 137 gastric cancer patients with nodal involvement who underwent R0 gastrectomy between September 2002 and December 2006. Lymph nodes with a short-axis diameter of 10 mm or more as measured by MDCT were regarded as metastasized. An appropriate cutoff value with a high positive predictive value (PPV) and high specificity also was identified, and the subsequent clinicopathological characteristics and long-term outcomes were investigated.

Results

A cutoff value of 15 mm was found to be appropriate for grouping patients into large (≥15 mm) and small (<15 mm) lymph node metastasis (LLNM and SLNM) groups, with a high PPV (98.6 %) and specificity (99.8 %). There were no differences in clinicopathological characteristics between the groups except for pathological nodal status. In the LLNM group, the 5-year survival rate was 55 %, which was significantly lower than in the SLNM group (73.2 %; P = 0.008). After stratification by tumor depth, the same trend was observed in patients with pT3 disease (46.8 % vs. 72.7 %; P = 0.015) and those with pT4 disease (14.3 % vs. 64.8 %; P = 0.035).

Conclusions

Gastric cancer patients with lymph nodes measuring 15 mm or more preoperatively have worse long-term outcomes. These patients would therefore be suitable candidates for future clinical trials investigating the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapies.

Keywords

Gastric Cancer Positive Predictive Value Negative Predictive Value Gastric Cancer Patient Advanced Gastric Cancer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Maruyama K, Kaminishi M, Hayashi K, Isobe Y, Honda I, Katai H, Arai K, Kodera Y, Nashimoto A. Gastric cancer treated in 1991 in Japan: data analysis of nationwide registry. Gastric Cancer. 2006;9(2):51–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Isobe Y, Nashimoto A, Akazawa K, Oda I, Hayashi K, Miyashiro I, Katai H, Tsujitani S, Kodera Y, Seto Y, et al. Gastric cancer treatment in Japan: 2008 annual report of the JGCA nationwide registry. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14(4):301–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Macdonald JS, Smalley SR, Benedetti J, Hundahl SA, Estes NC, Stemmermann GN, Haller DG, Ajani JA, Gunderson LL, Jessup JM, et al. Chemoradiotherapy after surgery compared with surgery alone for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(10):725–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, Thompson JN, Van de Velde CJ, Nicolson M, Scarffe JH, Lofts FJ, Falk SJ, Iveson TJ, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(1):11–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kinoshita T, Konishi M, Nakagohri T, Inoue K, Oda T, Takahashi S, Boku N, Ohtsu A, Yoshida S. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 for scirrhous gastric cancer: a pilot study. Gastric Cancer. 2003;6(Suppl 1):40–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sakuramoto S, Sasako M, Yamaguchi T, Kinoshita T, Fujii M, Nashimoto A, Furukawa H, Nakajima T, Ohashi Y, Imamura H, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer with S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(18):1810–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yoshikawa T, Sasako M, Yamamoto S, Sano T, Imamura H, Fujitani K, Oshita H, Ito S, Kawashima Y, Fukushima N. Phase II study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extended surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer. Br J Surg. 2009;96(9):1015–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bang YJ, Kim YW, Yang HK, Chung HC, Park YK, Lee KH, Lee KW, Kim YH, Noh SI, Cho JY, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin for gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy (CLASSIC): a phase 3 open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9813):315–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Inoue T, Yachida S, Usuki H, Kimura T, Hagiike M, Okano K, Suzuki Y. Pilot feasibility study of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with S-1 in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer featuring adjacent tissue invasion or JGCA bulky N2 lymph node metastases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(9):2937–45.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tsuchida K, Yoshikawa T, Tsuburaya A, Cho H, Kobayashi O. Indications for staging laparoscopy in clinical T4M0 gastric cancer. World J Surg. 2011;35(12):2703–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kawaguchi T, Komatsu S, Ichikawa D, Okamoto K, Shiozaki A, Fujiwara H, Murayama Y, Kuriu Y, Ikoma H, Nakanishi M, et al. Nodal Counts on MDCT as a Surrogate Marker for Surgical Curability in Gastric Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(8):2465–70.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yan C, Zhu ZG, Yan M, Zhang H, Pan ZL, Chen J, Xiang M, Chen MM, Liu BY, Yin HR, 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;100(3):205–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yan C, Zhu ZG, Yan M, Zhang H, Pan ZL, Chen J, Xiang M, Chen MM, Liu BY, Yin HR, et al. Size of the largest lymph node visualized on multi-detector-row computed tomography (MDCT) is useful in predicting metastatic lymph node status of gastric cancer. J Int Med Res. 2010;38(1):22–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen CY, Hsu JS, Wu DC, Kang WY, Hsieh JS, Jaw TS, Wu MT, Liu GC. Gastric cancer: preoperative local staging with 3D multi-detector row CT–correlation with surgical and histopathologic results. Radiology. 2007;242(2):472–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim YN, Choi D, Kim SH, Kim MJ, Lee SJ, Lee WJ, Kim S, Kim JJ. Gastric cancer staging at isotropic MDCT including coronal and sagittal MPR images: endoscopically diagnosed early vs. advanced gastric cancer. Abdom Imaging. 2009;34(1):26–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim HJ, Kim AY, Oh ST, Kim JS, Kim KW, Kim PN, Lee MG, Ha HK. Gastric cancer staging at multi-detector row CT gastrography: comparison of transverse and volumetric CT scanning. Radiology. 2005;236(3):879–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yang DM, Kim HC, Jin W, Ryu CW, Kang JH, Park CH, Kim HS, Jung DH. 64 multidetector-row computed tomography for preoperative evaluation of gastric cancer: histological correlation. J Comp Assist Tomogr. 2007;31(1):98–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ahn HS, Lee HJ, Yoo MW, Kim SG, Im JP, Kim SH, Kim WH, Lee KU, Yang HK. Diagnostic accuracy of T and N stages with endoscopy, stomach protocol CT, and endoscopic ultrasonography in early gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2009;99(1):20–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sobin L, Gospodarowicz M, Wittekind C. TNM classification of malignant tumors. 7th ed. New York: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Japanese gastric cancer: a Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma. 2nd English Edition. Gastric Cancer. 1998;1(1):10–24.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kwee RM, Kwee TC. Imaging in assessing lymph node status in gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer. 2009;12(1):6–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dhar DK, Kubota H, Kinukawa N, Maruyama R, Kyriazanos ID, Ohno S, Nagasue N. Prognostic significance of metastatic lymph node size in patients with gastric cancer. Br J Surg. 2003;90(12):1522–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schweartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dhar DK, Yoshimura H, Kinukawa N, Maruyama R, Tachibana M, Kohno H, Kubota H, Nagasue N. Metastatic lymph node size and colorectal cancer prognosis. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;200(1):20–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dhar DK, Tachibana M, Kinukawa N, Riruke M, Kohno H, Little AG, Nagasue N. The prognostic significance of lymph node size in patients with squamous esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(10):1010–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cheong O, Oh ST, Kim BS, Yook JH, Kim JH, Im JT, Park GC. Large metastatic lymph node size, especially more than 2 cm: independent predictor of poor prognosis in node-positive gastric carcinoma. World J Surg. 2008;32(2):262–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masanori Tokunaga
    • 1
    Email author
  • Norihiko Sugisawa
    • 1
  • Yutaka Tanizawa
    • 1
  • Etsuro Bando
    • 1
  • Taiichi Kawamura
    • 1
  • Masanori Terashima
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Gastric SurgeryShizuoka Cancer CenterShizuokaJapan

Personalised recommendations