Cargando…

Prognostic value of lymph node density on cancer staging system for gastric cancer without distal metastasis: a population-based analysis of SEER database

BACKGROUND: Accurate tumor staging is the cornerstone of tumor treatment. Current tumor staging system for gastric cancer (GC) is based on regional positive lymph nodes while ignoring the total number of examined lymph nodes. We aim to assess the prognostic value of lymph node density (LND), the rat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Yuhua, Cui, Hao, Xu, Xinxin, Liang, Wenquan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9520926/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36175896
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-022-02795-9
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Accurate tumor staging is the cornerstone of tumor treatment. Current tumor staging system for gastric cancer (GC) is based on regional positive lymph nodes while ignoring the total number of examined lymph nodes. We aim to assess the prognostic value of lymph node density (LND), the ratio of positive nodes to the total number examined nodes, in GC without distal metastasis. METHODS: Clinical information of patients with histologically confirmed GC and without distal metastasis was identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2010 and 2015. The X-Tile software was used to identify the ideal prognosis-related cutoff point for LND. The prognostic value of LND on cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed in Cox regression models. Subgroup analysis stratified by LND was performed on current lymph node staging system to further explore the interaction between LND and current lymph node staging system. RESULTS: A total of 4281 participants were identified from the SEER database for the final analysis. The optimal prognosis-related cutoff values of LND were calculated as 0.1 and 0.4, and LND was divided into three levels: LND1 (< 0.1), LND2 (> = 0.1, < 0.4), and LND3 (> = 0.4). LND3 was associated with worse CSS and OS in GC patients. Compared to patients with LND1, those with LND2 and LND3 had 2.43 (HR = 2.43, 95% CI 2.09–2.84, P < 0.001) and 4.69 (HR = 4.69, 95% CI 4.02–5.48, P < 0.001) folds increase in mortality in CSS, respectively. Similar results were found in the evaluation of OS in GC patients. Subgroup analysis stratified by LND also found that patients in the same current lymph node stage still had different prognosis due to the different LND levels after adjustment for other prognosis-related covariates (all P values < 0.001). CONCLUSION: LND is an independent prognostic factor for GC without distal metastasis. In the current lymph node staging system, LND has potential value in further accurately classifying GC patients without distal metastasis. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-022-02795-9.