Tumor Budding Detection by Immunohistochemical Staining is Not Superior to Hematoxylin and Eosin Staining for Predicting Lymph Node Metastasis in pT1 Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tumor budding is recognized as an important risk factor for lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer. Immunohistochemical staining for cytokeratin has the potential to improve the objective diagnosis of tumor budding over detection based on hematoxylin and eosin staining. However, it remains unclear whether tumor budding detected by immunohistochemical staining is a significant predictor of lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to clarify the clinical significance of tumor budding detected by immunohistochemical staining in comparison with that detected by hematoxylin and eosin staining. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at Niigata University Medical & Dental Hospital. PATIENTS: We enrolled 265 patients with pT1 colorectal cancer who underwent surgery with lymph node dissection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Tumor budding was evaluated by both hematoxylin and eosin and immunohistochemical staining with the use of CAM5.2 antibody. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were conducted to determine the optimal cutoff values for tumor budding detected by hematoxylin and eosin and CAM5.2 staining. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the significant factors for predicting lymph node metastasis. RESULTS: Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses revealed that the cutoff values for tumor budding detected by hematoxylin and eosin and CAM5.2 staining for predicting lymph node metastases were 5 and 8. On multivariate analysis, histopathological differentiation (OR, 6.21; 95% CI, 1.16-33.33; p = 0.03) and tumor budding detected by hematoxylin and eosin staining (OR, 4.91; 95% CI, 1.64-14.66; p = 0.004) were significant predictors for lymph node metastasis; however, tumor budding detected by CAM5.2 staining was not a significant predictor. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by potential selection bias because surgically resected specimens were collected instead of endoscopically resected specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor budding detected by CAM5.2 staining was not superior to hematoxylin and eosin staining for predicting lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer.

Gastrojejunostomy as induction treatment for S-1-based chemotherapy in patients with incurable gastric cancer.

PURPOSE: The development of new generation anticancer agents, including the oral drug, S-1, may alter the clinical importance of gastrojejunostomy in the treatment of incurable gastric cancer. We reviewed a series of patients who underwent gastrojejunostomy for this reason between 2002 and 2005. METHODS: Fourteen patients underwent gastrojejunostomy followed by S-1-based chemotherapy for incurable gastric cancer with obstruction or stenosis of the gastric outlet at Niigata University Medical and Dental Hospital and two affiliated hospitals. The safety of gastrojejunostomy, outcome of palliation, and survival time were analyzed retrospectively. We compared the survival times with those of patients who underwent palliative gastrectomy or exploratory laparotomy between 1987 and 2001. RESULTS: The median operative time and blood loss were 153 min and 66 ml, respectively. There were no major complications. The median starting time for chemotherapy after gastrojejunostomy was 15.5 days. All patients were discharged after gastrojejunostomy, and the median postoperative home stay ratio was 68%. The median survival time after gastrojejunostomy was 354 days, which was significantly longer than that of patients who underwent palliative gastrectomy or exploratory laparotomy. CONCLUSION: Gastrojejunostomy for incurable gastric cancer contributes not only to improving quality of life (QOL), but to prolonging survival through the induction and maintenance of S-1-based chemotherapy.