[A multi-center retrospective study of perioperative chemotherapy for gastric cancer based on real-world data].

ABSTRACT

Objective: To explore the effect of perioperative chemotherapy on the prognosis of gastric cancer patients under real-world condition. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was carried out. Real world data of gastric cancer patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy and surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy in 33 domestic hospitals from January 1, 2014 to January 31, 2016 were collected. Inclusion criteria (1) gastric adenocarcinoma was confirmed by histopathology, and clinical stage was cT2-4aN0-3M0 (AJCC 8th edition); (2) D2 radical gastric cancer surgery was performed; (3) at least one cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) was completed; (4) at least 4 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) [SOX (S-1+oxaliplatin) or CapeOX (capecitabine + oxaliplatin)] were completed. Exclusion criteria (1) complicated with other malignant tumors; (2) radiotherapy received; (3) patients with incomplete data. The enrolled patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy were included in the perioperative chemotherapy group, and those who received only postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy were included in the surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy group. Propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to control selection bias. The primary outcome were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after PSM. OS was defined as the time from the first neoadjuvant chemotherapy (operation + adjuvant chemotherapy group from the date of operation) to the last effective follow-up or death. PFS was defined as the time from the first neoadjuvant chemotherapy (operation + adjuvant chemotherapy group from the date of operation) to the first imaging diagnosis of tumor progression or death. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the survival rate, and the Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the independent effect of perioperative chemo therapy on OS and PFS. Results: 2 045 cases were included, including 1 293 cases in the surgery+adjuvant chemotherapy group and 752 cases in the perioperative chemotherapy group. After PSM, 492 pairs were included in the analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in gender, age, body mass index, tumor stage before treatment, and tumor location between the two groups (all P>0.05). Compared with the surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy group, patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group had higher proportion of total gastrectomy (χ(2)=40.526, P<0.001), smaller maximum tumor diameter (t=3.969, P<0.001), less number of metastatic lymph nodes (t=1.343, P<0.001), lower ratio of vessel invasion (χ(2)=11.897, P=0.001) and nerve invasion (χ(2)=12.338, P<0.001). In the perioperative chemotherapy group and surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy group, 24 cases (4.9%) and 17 cases (3.4%) developed postoperative complications, respectively, and no significant difference was found between two groups (χ(2)=0.815, P=0.367). The median OS of the perioperative chemotherapy group was longer than that of the surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy group (65 months vs. 45 months, HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.89, P=0.001); the median PFS of the perioperative chemotherapy group was also longer than that of the surgery+adjuvant chemotherapy group (56 months vs. 36 months, HR=0.72, 95% CI0.61-0.85, P<0.001). The forest plot results of subgroup analysis showed that both men and women could benefit from perioperative chemotherapy (all P<0.05); patients over 45 years of age (P<0.05) and with normal body mass (P<0.01) could benefit significantly; patients with cTNM stage II and III presented a trend of benefit or could benefit significantly (P<0.05); patients with signet ring cell carcinoma benefited little (P>0.05); tumors in the gastric body and gastric antrum benefited more significantly (P<0.05). Conclusion: Perioperative chemotherapy can improve the prognosis of gastric cancer patients.