Population-based outcome of stage IA-IIA resected gastric adenocarcinoma: who should get adjuvant treatment?

BACKGROUND: The benefit of adjuvant treatment in gastric adenocarcinoma was demonstrated by randomized, controlled trials of patients with locally advanced tumors. Thus, its role for stage IIB-IIIC disease is widely accepted. We aimed to identify patients with stage IA-IIA gastric adenocarcinoma who have a poor prognosis and thus may benefit from adjuvant treatment. METHODS: Patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent surgical resection with pathological evaluation of ≥15 lymph nodes and had available disease-specific survival (DSS) data were identified from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Registry. Survival differences were evaluated with the log-rank test and Cox multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Stage and TN grouping strongly predicted DSS (P < 0.001, P < 0.001). Stage IA tumors had an excellent outcome: 91 ± 1.2 % 5-year DSS. The TN groupings of stages IB and IIA had the next best outcomes with 5-year DSS from 66 ± 4.6 % to 81 ± 2.3 %. Older age (P < 0.001), higher grade (P = 0.004), larger tumor size (P < 0.001), and proximal tumor location (P < 0.001) were independent predictors of worse DSS in stage IB-IIA tumors. We devised a risk stratification scheme for stage IB-IIA tumors where 1 point was assigned for age >60 years, tumor size >5 cm, proximal tumor location, and grade other than well-differentiated. Five-year DSS was 100 % for patients with 0 points; 86 ± 4.3 %, 1 point; 76 ± 3 %, 2 points; 72 ± 2.8 %, 3 points; and 48 ± 4.9 %, 4 points (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with stage IB-IIA gastric adenocarcinoma and ≥2 adverse features (age >60 years, tumor size >5 cm, proximal location, and high-grade) have 5-year DSS ≤76 %. Adjuvant therapy may be warranted for these patients.

Tumor size and depth predict rate of lymph node metastasis in colon carcinoids and can be used to select patients for endoscopic resection.

BACKGROUND: Regional lymphadenectomy is recommended for all colon carcinoids, whereas resection without lymphadenectomy is accepted for selected appendiceal and rectal carcinoids. We examined the relation of tumor size and depth to lymph node metastasis in order to determine whether colon carcinoids could be selected for endoscopic resection. METHODS: Patients were identified from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Registry. The Pearson chi-square and the log rank tests were used. P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: We identified 929 patients who underwent resection of localized colon carcinoids without distant metastasis diagnosed from 1973 to 2006. The diagnosis of small and superficial tumors increased over time (p < 0.001). The presence of lymph node metastasis was adversely associated with survival (p < 0.001); however, there was only a trend toward independence on multivariate analysis (p = 0.054). Tumor size and depth were associated with lymph node metastasis (p < 0.001, p < 0.001). Tumors were subgrouped by size and depth to find cases with a low risk of lymph node metastasis. Intramucosal tumors < 1 cm had a 4% rate of lymph node metastasis, while all other subgroups had rates ≥ 14%. CONCLUSION: Tumor size and depth predict lymph node metastasis for colon carcinoids. Endoscopic resection may be appropriate for intramucosal tumors <1 cm.

Tumor size and depth predict rate of lymph node metastasis and utilization of lymph node sampling in surgically managed gastric carcinoids.

BACKGROUND: Radical resection with regional lymphadenectomy is recommended for all sporadic gastric carcinoids. Local resection, however, is accepted for some carcinoids from other gastrointestinal sites (i.e., appendix and rectum). We sought to examine the relation of tumor size and depth to lymph node metastasis to determine whether gastric carcinoids can be selected for endoscopic resection. We also sought to quantify the utilization of lymph node sampling. METHODS: 984 patients with localized gastric carcinoids who underwent cancer-directed surgery between 1983 and 2005 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry database. RESULTS: Tumor size and depth predicted probability of lymph node metastasis. Lymph node metastasis was not seen in intraepithelial (IE) tumors <2 cm. Of tumors <1 cm invading into the lamina propria or submucosa (LP/SM), 3.4% had lymph node metastasis. Excluding IE tumors <2 cm and LP/SM tumors <1 cm, all other subgroups based on size and depth had rates of lymph node metastasis ≥ 8%. Tumor size and depth predicted probability of lymph node sampling. Overall, only 21% of tumors had lymph node sampling. Excluding IE tumors <2 cm and LP/SM tumors <1 cm, only 43% of tumors had lymph node sampling. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor size and depth predict lymph node metastasis for gastric carcinoids. Endoscopic resection may be appropriate for intraepithelial (IE) tumors <2 cm and perhaps tumors <1 cm invading into the lamina propria or submucosa. Lymph node sampling is underused for gastric carcinoids at high risk for lymph node metastasis.