Establishment and validation of a nomogram for predicting prognosis of gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms based on data from 490 cases in a single center / 南方医科大学学报

OBJECTIVE@#To develop and validate a nomogram for predicting outcomes of patients with gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (G-NENs).@*METHODS@#We retrospectively collected the clinical data from 490 patients with the diagnosis of G-NEN at our medical center from 2000 to 2021. Log-rank test was used to analyze the overall survival (OS) of the patients. The independent risk factors affecting the prognosis of G-NEN were identified by Cox regression analysis to construct the prognostic nomogram, whose performance was evaluated using the C-index, receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve, area under the ROC curve (AUC), calibration curve, DCA, and AUDC.@*RESULTS@#Among the 490 G-NEN patients (mean age of 58.6±10.92 years, including 346 male and 144 female patients), 130 (26.5%) had NET G1, 54 (11.0%) had NET G2, 206 (42.0%) had NEC, and 100 (20.5%) had MiNEN. None of the patients had NET G3. The numbers of patients in stage Ⅰ-Ⅳ were 222 (45.3%), 75 (15.3%), 130 (26.5%), and 63 (12.9%), respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified age, pathological grade, tumor location, depth of invasion, lymph node metastasis, distant metastasis, and F-NLR as independent risk factors affecting the survival of the patients (P < 0.05). The C-index of the prognostic nomogram was 0.829 (95% CI: 0.800-0.858), and its AUC for predicting 1-, 3- and 5-year OS were 0.883, 0.895 and 0.944, respectively. The calibration curve confirmed a good consistency between the model prediction results and the actual observations. For predicting 1-year, 3-year and 5-year OS, the TNM staging system and the nomogram had AUC of 0.033 vs 0.0218, 0.191 vs 0.148, and 0.248 vs 0.197, respectively, suggesting higher net benefit and better clinical utility of the nomogram.@*CONCLUSION@#The prognostic nomogram established in this study has good predictive performance and clinical value to facilitate prognostic evaluation of individual patients with G-NEN.

Analysis of clinicopathological characteristics, therapeutic strategy and prognosis of 501 patients with gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms attending a single center / 中华胃肠外科杂志

Objective: To explore the clinicopathological features, treatment strategy and to analysis of prognosis-related risk factors of gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms(G-NEN). Methods: In this study, a retrospective observational study method was used to collect the clinicopathological data of patients diagnosed with G-NEN by pathological examination in the First Medical Center of PLA General Hospital from January 2000 to December 2021. The basic information of the patients, tumor pathological characteristics, and treatment methods were entered, and the treatment information and survival data after discharge were followed up and recorded. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to construct survival curves, and the log-rank test to analyze the differences in survival between groups. Cox Regression model analysis of risk factors affecting the prognosis of G-NEN patients. Results: Among the 501 cases confirmed as G-NEN, 355 were male and 146 were female, and their median age was 59 years. The cohort comprised 130 patients (25.9%) of neuroendocrine tumor (NET) G1, 54 (10.8%) of NET G2, 225 (42.9%) of neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC), and 102 cases (20.4%) of mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine(MiNEN). Patients NET G1 and NET G2 were mainly treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). The main treatment for patients with NEC/MiNEN was the same as that for gastric malignancies, namely radical gastrectomy+lymph node dissection supplemented with postoperative chemotherapy. There were significant differences in sex, age, maximum tumor diameter, tumor morphology, tumor numbers, tumor location, depth of invasion, lymph node metastasis, distant metastasis, TNM staging and expression of immunohistological markers Syn and CgA among NET, NEC, and MiNEN patients (all P<0.05). Further for NET subgroup analysis, there were significant differences between NET G1 and NET G2 in the maximum tumor diameter, tumor shape and depth of invasion(all P<0.05). 490 patients (490/501, 97.8%) were followed up with a median of 31.2 months. 163 patients had a death during follow-up (NET G1 2, NET G2 1, NEC 114, MiNEN 46). For NET G1, NET G2, NEC and MiNEN patients,the 1-year overall survival rates were 100%, 100%, 80.1% and 86.2%, respectively; the 3-year survival rates were 98.9%, 100%, 43.5% and 55.1%, respectively. The differences were statistically significant (P<0.001). Univariate analysis showed that gender, age, smoking history, alcohol history, tumor pathological grade, tumor morphology, tumor location, tumor size, lymph node metastasis, distant metastasis, and TNM stage were associated with the prognosis of G-NEN patients (all P<0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that age ≥60 years, pathological grade of NEC and MiNEN, distant metastasis, and TNM stage III-IV were independent factors influencing the survival of G-NEN patients (all P<0.05). 63 cases were stage IV at initial diagnosis. 32 of these were treated with surgery and 31 with palliative chemotherapy. Stage IV subgroup analysis showed that the 1-year survival rates were 68.1% and 46.2% in the surgical treatment and palliative chemotherapy groups, respectively, and the 3-year survival rates were 20.9% and 10.3%, respectively; the differences were statistically significant (P=0.016). Conclusions: G-NEN is a heterogeneous group of tumors. Different pathological grades of G-NEN have different clinicopathological features and prognosis. Factors such as age ≥ 60 years old, pathological grade of NEC/MiNEN, distant metastasis, stage III, IV mostly indicate poor prognosis of patients. Therefore, we should improve the ability of early diagnosis and treatment, and pay more attention to patients with advanced age and NEC/MiNEN. Although this study concluded that surgery improves the prognosis of advanced patients more than palliative chemotherapy, the value of surgical treatment for patients with stage IV G-NEN remains controversial.

Abdominal drainage versus no drainage after laparoscopy-assisted D2 gastrectomy for gastric cancer / 中国实用外科杂志

OBJECTIVE: To clarify the value of unconventional prophylactic drain placement in laparoscopy assisted D2 gastrectomy for gastric cancer.METHODS: The clinical data of 193 patients with gastric cancer who underwent laparoscopy-assisted D2 Gastrectomy in Department of General Surgery,Chinese PLA General Hospital between February 2017 and February 2018 were analyzed retrospectively.The patients were divided into two groups according to whether the abdominal drain was placed.The drain group comprised 150 patients with routine prophylactic intraabdominal drain placement and the no drain group comprised 43 patients without intra-abdominal drain placement after laparoscopy-assisted D2 gastrectomy.The general information,post-operative recovery and the incidence of postoperative complications were compared in the two groups.RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the general information and postoperative complications in the two groups.The no drain group had shorter hospital stay[(7.17±0.14)d vs.(10.88±0.88) d,(P<0.05)],and shorter exhaust time[(3.39±0.21)d vs.(4.30±0.16)d,P<0.01],less pain [VAS(3.23±0.61) vs.(5.39±0.42),(P<0.05)] and less times of wound dressing change after operation [(3.53±0.52)vs.(7.81±1.05),(P<0.05)] compared with the drain group.CONCLUSION: The unconventional prophylactic drain placement in laparoscopy assisted D2 gastrectomy is safe and feasible.Unnecessary drain placement should be avoided.