Reappraise role of No. 10 lymphadenectomy for proximal gastric cancer in the era of minimal invasive surgery during total gastrectomy: a pooled analysis of 4 prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with locally advanced proximal gastric cancer (LAPGC), the individualized selection of patients with highly suspected splenic hilar (No. 10) lymph node (LN) metastasis to undergo splenic hilar lymphadenectomy, is a clinical dilemma. This study aimed to re-evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy (LSPSHL) and to identify the population who would benefit from it. METHODS: A total of 1068 patients (D2 group = 409; D2 + No. 10 group = 659) who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy from four prospective trials between January 2015 and July 2019 were analyzed. RESULTS: No significant difference in the incidence (16.9% vs. 16.4%; P = 0.837) of postoperative complications were found between the two groups. The metastasis rate of No. 10 LN among patients in the D2 + No. 10 group was 10.3% (68/659). Based on the decision tree, patients with LAPGC with tumor invading the greater curvature (Gre), patients with non-Gre-invading LAPGC with a tumor size > 5 cm and clinical positive locoregional LNs were defined as the high-priority No. 10 dissection group. The metastasis rate of No. 10 LNs in the high-priority group was 19.4% (41/211). In high-priority group, the 3-year overall survival of the D2 + No. 10 group was better than that of the D2 group (74.4% vs. 42.1%; P = 0.005), and the therapeutic index of No. 10 was higher than the indices of most suprapancreatic stations. CONCLUSIONS: LSPSHL for LAPGC is safe and feasible when performed by experienced surgeons. LSPSHL could be recommended for the high-priority group patients even without invasion of the Gre.

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic spleen-preserving No. 10 lymph node dissection for locally advanced upper third gastric cancer: a prospective, multicenter clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous retrospective studies have shown that laparoscopic spleen-preserving D2 total gastrectomy (LSTG) for advanced upper third gastric cancer (AUTGC) is safe. However, all previous studies were underpowered. We therefore conducted a prospective, multicenter study to evaluate the technical safety and feasibility of LSTG for patients with AUTGC. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with AUTGC (cT2-4a, N-/+, M0) underwent LSTG at 19 institutions between September 2016 and October 2017 were included. The number of No. 10 lymph node (LN) dissections, metastasis rates, intraoperative and postoperative complications were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 251 patients were enrolled in the study, and 242 patients were eligible for the per protocol analysis. The average numbers of No. 10 LN dissections and metastases were 2.4 and 0.1, respectively. Eighteen patients (7.4%) had No. 10 LN metastases, and among patients with advanced gastric cancer, the rate of No. 10 LN metastasis was 8.1% (18/223). pN3 status was an independent risk factor for No. 10 LN metastasis. Intraoperative complications occurred in 7 patients, but no patients required conversion to open surgery or splenectomy. The overall postoperative complication rate was 13.6% (33/242). The major complication and mortality rates were 3.3% (8/242) and 0.4% (1/242), respectively. The number of retrieved No. 10 LNs, No. 10 LN metastasis and TNM stage had no significant influence on postoperative complication rates. CONCLUSION: LSTG for AUTGC was safe and effective when performed by very experienced surgeons, this technique could be used in patients who needed splenic hilar lymph node dissection.

Therapeutic effect of laparoscopy-assisted D2 radical gastrectomy in 106 patients with advanced gastric cancer.

PURPOSE: To explore the feasibility and short-term effect of laparoscopy-assisted D2 radical gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: A total of 239 patients with advanced gastric cancer underwent D2 radical gastrectomy between March 2009 and June 2011, from which 106 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery (laparoscopy group) and 133 patients underwent open surgery (open surgery group). The intraoperative and postoperative condition, number of lymph node removed, complications and mortality rates between the two groups were compared. RESULTS: The operation time (268±51 min) and the number of lymph node removed (29.1+6.1) in the laparoscopy group were comparable with the operation time (268±49 min) and the number of lymph node removed (30.2±7.0) in the open surgery group, while there were significant differences in the intraoperative bleeding (134±66 vs 289±139 ml), intraoperative blood infusion cases (5 vs 19), time to first postoperative flatus (3.4±0.9 vs 5.0±1.4 days), time to first taking liquid food (7.3±1.3 vs 8.1±1.4 days) and postoperative hospital stay (12.8±2.6 vs 14.5±3.1 days) between the two groups (p<0.05). These results favored the laparoscopy group. The incidence of postoperative complications in the laparoscopy and open surgery group were 14.1 and 24.8, respectively (p<0.05). Compared with the open surgery, the laparoscopic surgery significantly reduced the incidence of pulmonary infection (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in the postoperative short-term survival rate between the two groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy-assisted D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer is advantageous in terms of safety and feasibility, rapid postoperative recovery and few complications. Both groups gave comparable results in terms of lymph node dissection and short-term survival.

Optimal postoperative surveillance strategies for cancer survivors with gastric neuroendocrine carcinoma based on individual risk: a multicenter real-world cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The best follow-up strategy for cancer survivors after treatment should balance the effectiveness and cost of disease detection while detecting recurrence as early as possible. Due to the low incidence of gastric neuroendocrine carcinoma and mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma [G-(MA)NEC], high-level evidence-based follow-up strategies is limited. Currently, there is a lack of consensus among clinical practice guidelines regarding the appropriate follow-up strategies for patients with resectable G-(MA)NEC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included patients diagnosed with G-(MA)NEC from 21 centers in China. The random forest survival model simulated the monthly probability of recurrence to establish an optimal surveillance schedule maximizing the power of detecting recurrence at each follow-up. The power and cost-effectiveness were compared with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society, and European Society for Medical Oncology Guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 801 patients with G-(MA)NEC were included. The patients were stratified into four distinct risk groups utilizing the modified TNM staging system. The study cohort comprised 106 (13.2%), 120 (15.0%), 379 (47.3%), and 196 cases (24.5%) for modified groups IIA, IIB, IIIA, and IIIB, respectively. Based on the monthly probability of disease recurrence, the authors established four distinct follow-up strategies for each risk group. The total number of follow-ups 5 years after surgery in the four groups was 12, 12, 13, and 13 times, respectively. The risk-based follow-up strategies demonstrated improved detection efficiency compared to existing clinical guidelines. Further Markov decision-analytic models verified that the risk-based follow-up strategies were better and more cost-effective than the control strategy recommended by the guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: This study developed four different monitoring strategies based on individualized risks for patients with G-(MA)NEC, which may improve the detection power at each visit and were more economical, effective. Even though our results are limited by the biases related to the retrospective study design, we believe that, in the absence of a randomized clinical trial, our findings should be considered when recommending follow-up strategies for G-(MA)NEC.

Effectiveness and Safety of Apatinib Plus Chemotherapy as Neoadjuvant Treatment for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

Importance: Apatinib is a novel treatment option for chemotherapy-refractory advanced gastric cancer (GC), but it has not been evaluated in patients with locally advanced GC. Objective: To investigate the effectiveness and safety of apatinib combined with S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) as a neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced GC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, prospective, single-group, open-label, phase 2 nonrandomized controlled trial was conducted in 10 centers in southern China. Patients with M0 and either clinical T2 to T4 or N+ disease were enrolled between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2019. Statistical analysis was performed from December 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020. Interventions: Eligible patients received apatinib (500 mg orally once daily on days 1 to 21 and discontinued in the last cycle) plus SOX (S-1: 40-60 mg orally twice daily on days 1 to 14; oxaliplatin: 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1) every 3 weeks for 2 to 5 cycles. A D2 gastrectomy was performed 2 to 4 weeks after the last cycle. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was R0 resection rate. Secondary end points were the response rate, toxic effects, and surgical outcome. Results: A total of 48 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.2 [8.2] years; 37 men [77.1%]) were enrolled in this study. Forty patients underwent surgery (38 had gastrectomy, and 2 had exploratory laparotomy), with an R0 resection rate of 75.0% (95% CI, 60.4%-86.4%). The radiologic response rate was 75.0%, and T downstaging was observed in 16 of 44 patients (36.4%). The pathological response rate was 54.2% (95% CI, 39.2%-68.6%); moreover, this rate was significantly higher in patients who achieved a radiologic response compared with those who did not (12 [80.0%] vs 1 [20.0%]; P = .03) and in those who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of 0 (20 [76.9%] vs 10 [45.5%]; P = .03) or had tumors located in the upper one-third of the stomach (16 [61.5%] vs 7 [31.8%]; P = .04). Patients who achieved a pathological response (vs those who did not) had significantly less blood loss (median [range]: 60 [10-200] mL vs 80 [20-300] mL; P = .04) and significantly more lymph nodes harvested (median [range]: 40 [24-67] vs 32 [19-51]; P = .04) during surgery. Postoperative complications were observed in 7 of 38 patients (18.4%). Grade 3 toxic effects occurred in 16 of 48 patients (33.3%), and no grade 4 toxic effects or preoperative deaths were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: This nonrandomized controlled trial found that apatinib combined with SOX was effective and had an acceptable safety profile as a neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced GC. A large-scale randomized clinical trial may be needed to confirm the findings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03192735.