• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

一个可靠的 IV 期食管胃结合部癌症风险评分。

A reliable risk score for stage IV esophagogastric cancer.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Aug;39(8):823-30. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.01.005. Epub 2013 Jan 31.

DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2013.01.005
PMID:23375470
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The role of surgery for patients with metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGC) is not defined. The purpose of this study was to define selection criteria for patients who may benefit from resection following systemic chemotherapy.

METHODS

From 1987 to 2007, 160 patients presenting with synchronous metastatic EGC (cT3/4 cNany cM0/1 finally pM1) were treated with chemotherapy followed by resection of the primary tumor and metastases. Clinical and histopathological data, site and number of metastases were analyzed. A prognostic score was established and validated in a second cohort from another academic center (n = 32).

RESULTS

The median survival (MS) in cohort 1 was 13.6 months. Significant prognostic factors were grading (p = 0.046), ypT- (p = 0.001), ypN- (p = 0.011) and R-category (p = 0.015), lymphangiosis (p = 0.021), clinical (p = 0.004) and histopathological response (p = 0.006), but not localization or number of metastases. The addition of grading (G1/2:0 points; G3/4:1 points), clinical response (responder: 0; nonresponder: 1) and R-category (complete:0; R1:1; R2:2) defines two groups of patients with significantly different survival (p = 0.001) [low risk group (Score 0/1), n = 22: MS 35.3 months, 3-year-survival 47.6%); high risk group (Score 2/3/4) n = 126: MS 12.0 months, 3-year-survival 14.2%]. The score showed a strong trend in the validation cohort (p = 0.063) [low risk group (MS not reached, 3-year-survival 57.1%); high risk group (MS 19.9 months, 3-year-survival 6.7%)].

CONCLUSION

We observed long-term survival after resection of metastatic EGC. A simple clinical score may help to identify a subgroup of patients with a high chance of benefit from resection. However, the accurate estimation of achieving a complete resection, which is an integral element of the score, remains challenging.

摘要

背景

对于患有转移性胃食管腺癌(EGC)的患者,手术的作用尚未明确。本研究的目的是确定可能从系统化疗后切除中获益的患者的选择标准。

方法

1987 年至 2007 年,160 名患有同步转移性 EGC(cT3/4 cNany cM0/1 最终 pM1)的患者接受了化疗,随后切除了原发肿瘤和转移灶。分析了临床和组织病理学数据、转移部位和数量。在另一家学术中心的第二队列中建立并验证了预后评分(n=32)。

结果

队列 1 的中位生存期(MS)为 13.6 个月。显著的预后因素包括分级(p=0.046)、ypT-(p=0.001)、ypN-(p=0.011)和 R 类别(p=0.015)、淋巴管浸润(p=0.021)、临床(p=0.004)和组织病理学反应(p=0.006),但与定位或转移数量无关。分级(G1/2:0 分;G3/4:1 分)、临床反应(应答者:0;无应答者:1)和 R 类别(完全:0;R1:1;R2:2)的添加定义了两组生存时间显著不同的患者(p=0.001)[低风险组(评分 0/1),n=22:MS 35.3 个月,3 年生存率 47.6%);高风险组(评分 2/3/4),n=126:MS 12.0 个月,3 年生存率 14.2%)。该评分在验证队列中显示出明显的趋势(p=0.063)[低风险组(MS 未达到,3 年生存率 57.1%);高风险组(MS 19.9 个月,3 年生存率 6.7%)]。

结论

我们观察到转移性 EGC 切除后的长期生存。一个简单的临床评分可能有助于确定具有高切除获益机会的患者亚组。然而,准确估计达到完全切除的可能性(这是评分的一个组成部分)仍然具有挑战性。

相似文献

1
A reliable risk score for stage IV esophagogastric cancer.一个可靠的 IV 期食管胃结合部癌症风险评分。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Aug;39(8):823-30. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.01.005. Epub 2013 Jan 31.
2
Perioperative chemotherapy for resectable gastroesophageal cancer: a single-center experience.可切除胃食管交界癌的围手术期化疗:单中心经验。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Aug;39(8):814-22. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.05.003. Epub 2013 Jun 5.
3
Is preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery the appropriate treatment for signet ring cell containing adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction and stomach?术前化疗后进行手术是否是食管胃交界部和胃含印戒细胞腺癌的合适治疗方法?
Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 May;21(5):1739-48. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3462-z. Epub 2014 Jan 14.
4
Significance of histopathological tumor regression after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in gastric adenocarcinomas: a summary of 480 cases.新辅助化疗后胃腺癌的组织病理学肿瘤退缩的意义:480 例总结。
Ann Surg. 2011 May;253(5):934-9. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318216f449.
5
Prediction of response and prognosis by a score including only pretherapeutic parameters in 410 neoadjuvant treated gastric cancer patients.仅纳入新辅助治疗前参数的评分预测 410 例胃癌患者的反应和预后。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Jul;19(7):2119-27. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2254-1. Epub 2012 Mar 7.
6
Hepatic resection for synchronous hepatic metastasis from gastric cancer.胃癌肝转移同期行肝切除术。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Jul;39(7):694-700. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.03.006. Epub 2013 Apr 8.
7
Tumor stage after neoadjuvant chemotherapy determines survival after surgery for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction.新辅助化疗后的肿瘤分期决定了食管和食管胃交界腺癌手术后的生存情况。
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Sep 20;32(27):2983-90. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.9070.
8
Role of repeat staging laparoscopy in locoregionally advanced gastric or gastroesophageal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy.新辅助治疗后局部晚期胃癌或胃食管交界癌重复分期腹腔镜检查的作用。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Feb;20(2):548-54. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2598-6. Epub 2012 Sep 1.
9
Predictors of long-term survival after resection of esophageal carcinoma with nonregional nodal metastases.伴有非区域淋巴结转移的食管癌切除术后长期生存的预测因素。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2009 Jul;88(1):186-92; discussion 192-3. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.03.079.
10
Survival in Patients With Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Trimodality Therapy Is Independent of Regional Lymph Node Location.接受三联疗法的食管腺癌患者的生存率与区域淋巴结位置无关。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2016 Mar;101(3):1075-80; Discussion 1080-1. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.09.063. Epub 2015 Dec 8.

引用本文的文献

1
A predictive model for advanced esophageal cancer involving the lower third of the esophagus.一种针对累及食管下三分之一的晚期食管癌的预测模型。
Transl Cancer Res. 2024 Dec 31;13(12):6661-6674. doi: 10.21037/tcr-24-1116. Epub 2024 Dec 17.
2
The Role of Metastasectomy in Patients with Liver-Only Metastases from Gastric Adenocarcinoma.胃腺癌仅肝转移患者中肝转移瘤切除术的作用
Ann Surg Oncol. 2025 Jan;32(1):391-398. doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-16318-1. Epub 2024 Sep 30.
3
Surgical and multimodal treatment of metastatic oesophageal cancer: retrospective cohort study.
外科和多模式治疗转移性食管鳞癌:回顾性队列研究。
BJS Open. 2024 May 8;8(3). doi: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae054.
4
Outcomes after Surgical Treatment of Oesophagogastric Cancer with Synchronous Liver Metastases: A Multicentre Retrospective Cohort Study.同步肝转移的食管癌和胃癌手术治疗后的结局:一项多中心回顾性队列研究
Cancers (Basel). 2024 Feb 16;16(4):797. doi: 10.3390/cancers16040797.
5
Influence of Primary Tumor Resection on Survival of Patients With Metastatic Siewert Type II Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction: A Population-Based, Propensity-Matched Analysis.原发肿瘤切除术对胃食管结合部 Siewert Ⅱ型腺癌转移患者生存的影响:基于人群的倾向评分匹配分析。
Cancer Control. 2023 Jan-Dec;30:10732748231208313. doi: 10.1177/10732748231208313.
6
Nomogram for predicting the likelihood of liver metastases at initial diagnosis in patients with Siewert type II gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.预测 Siewert Ⅱ型胃食管结合部腺癌患者初始诊断时肝转移可能性的列线图。
Sci Rep. 2023 Jul 7;13(1):11032. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-37318-3.
7
Survival after Multimodal Treatment Including Surgery for Metastatic Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review.包括手术在内的多模式治疗转移性食管癌后的生存情况:一项系统评价
Cancers (Basel). 2022 Aug 16;14(16):3956. doi: 10.3390/cancers14163956.
8
A machine learning model predicting candidates for surgical treatment modality in patients with distant metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma: A propensity score-matched analysis.预测远处转移性食管腺癌患者手术治疗方式候选者的机器学习模型:倾向评分匹配分析
Front Oncol. 2022 Jul 22;12:862536. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.862536. eCollection 2022.
9
Clinical characteristics and prediction model of long time survival of patients with stage M1 Siewert type II esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma.M1期Siewert II型食管胃交界腺癌患者长期生存的临床特征及预测模型
Transl Cancer Res. 2021 May;10(5):2002-2008. doi: 10.21037/tcr-20-3291.
10
A population-based predictive model predicting candidate for primary tumor surgery in patients with metastatic esophageal cancer.一种基于人群的预测模型,用于预测转移性食管癌患者原发性肿瘤手术的候选者。
J Thorac Dis. 2021 Feb;13(2):870-882. doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-2347.