Application of Gross Tissue Response System in Gastric Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Primary Report of a Prospective Cohort Study

Objective We previously established a gross tissue response (GTR) system to evaluate the intraoperative response of perigastric tissue in patients with gastric cancers to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. This prospective cohort study aims to confirm the relationship between gross tissue response and clinicopathological characteristics and explore the possibility of using the GTR system to predict the difficulty of surgery and the occurrence of postoperative complications within 30 days. Methods A total of 102 patients with gastric cancer from January 2019 to April 2020 were enrolled in this study. The degrees of fibrosis, edema, and effusion in the perigastric tissues were assessed intraoperatively according to the GTR system. We systematically analyzed the relations between GTR and clinicopathological characteristics, and then a prediction model that includes GTR was established to predict the difficulty of surgery and the occurrence of postoperative complications within 30 days. Results Finally, the study included 71 male patients and 31 female patients. The patients had an average age of 58.79 ± 1.03 years, BMI of 22.89 ± 0.29, and tumor diameter of 4.50 ± 0.27 cm. Among these patients, 17 underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy, 85 underwent open gastrectomy, the average operation time was 294.63 ± 4.84 minutes, and the mean volume of intraoperative blood loss was 94.65 ± 5.30 ml. The overall 30-day postoperative complication rate was 19.6% (20/102). The total GTR was significantly related to the primary tumor stage, operation time and 30-day postoperative complication rate (p<0.05). Edema and effusion were significantly related to intraoperative blood loss (p<0.05). The logistic regression analysis identified that the total GTR score (score: 4-9, OR 2.888, 95% CI: 1.035-8.062, p = 0.043) was an independent risk factor for postoperative complications within 30 days, and the total GTR score (score 4-9, OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.219-9.045, p=0.019) was also an independent risk factor for operation time. The AUC of the total GTR score for predicting postoperative complications within 30 days was 0.681. Conclusion According to the results of the present study, the gross tissue response (GTR) system is an effective tool that may be used to predict the risk of a difficult operation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and postoperative complications. Although neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves the therapeutic effect, it also increases the risk of surgical trauma and postoperative complications. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03791268.

[1]  Yuquan Wei,et al.  Genomic evolution and diverse models of systemic metastases in colorectal cancer , 2021, Gut.

[2]  J. Ji,et al.  Assessment of Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. , 2019, JAMA surgery.

[3]  Jong Hoon Kim,et al.  Local excision in mid-to-low rectal cancer patients who revealed clinically total or near-total regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy; a proposed trial , 2019, BMC Cancer.

[4]  Wei Xiong,et al.  Analysis of status and countermeasures of cancer incidence and mortality in China , 2019, Science China Life Sciences.

[5]  R. Komaki,et al.  A pooled analysis of individual patient data (IPD) of concurrent chemoradiotherapy for limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) in elderly compared to younger patients (pts) who participated in US National Cancer Institute cooperative group studies. , 2018, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[6]  Zongguang Zhou,et al.  [Establishment and preliminary application of tissue response grading system following neoadjuvant chemotherapy]. , 2018, Zhonghua wei chang wai ke za zhi = Chinese journal of gastrointestinal surgery.

[7]  J. Ajani Faculty Opinions recommendation of Peri-operative chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in operable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma (UK Medical Research Council ST03): primary analysis results of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2-3 trial. , 2018, Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature.

[8]  T. Hothorn,et al.  Tumor Regression Grading After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy as a Prognostic Factor and Individual-Level Surrogate for Disease-Free Survival in Rectal Cancer , 2017, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[9]  R. Agha,et al.  The STROCSS statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery. , 2017, International journal of surgery.

[10]  H. Grabsch,et al.  Peri-operative chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in operable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma (UK Medical Research Council ST03): primary analysis results of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2–3 trial , 2017, The Lancet. Oncology.

[11]  R. Sant'ana,et al.  Histopathological regression of gastric adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy: a critical review , 2017, APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica.

[12]  J. Sul,et al.  Clinical Outcome of Doublet and Triplet Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer. , 2016, The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi.

[13]  Chao Lu,et al.  Retrospective study , 2016, Medicine.

[14]  Japanese Gastric Cancer Association Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4) , 2016, Gastric Cancer.

[15]  W. Kang,et al.  Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Treatment on Prognosis of Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer: a Retrospective Study. , 2015, Chinese medical sciences journal = Chung-kuo i hsueh k'o hsueh tsa chih.

[16]  A. Setser,et al.  Grading Dermatologic Adverse Events in Clinical Trials Using CTCAE v4.0 , 2013 .

[17]  J. Reynolds,et al.  Classification of Pathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy in Esophageal and Junctional Cancer: Assessment of Existing Measures and Proposal of a Novel 3-Point Standard , 2013, Annals of surgery.

[18]  Laura H. Tang,et al.  Recurrence and survival after pathologic complete response to preoperative therapy followed by surgery for gastric or gastrooesophageal adenocarcinoma , 2011, British Journal of Cancer.

[19]  J. Pignon,et al.  Perioperative chemotherapy compared with surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: an FNCLCC and FFCD multicenter phase III trial. , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[20]  R. Langer,et al.  Significance of Histopathological Tumor Regression After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Gastric Adenocarcinomas: A Summary of 480 Cases , 2011, Annals of surgery.

[21]  Karin Haustermans,et al.  Long-term outcome in patients with a pathological complete response after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data. , 2010, The Lancet. Oncology.

[22]  T. Henkel,et al.  Assessment of a HER2 scoring system for gastric cancer: results from a validation study , 2008, Histopathology.

[23]  L. Rubbia‐Brandt,et al.  Importance of histological tumor response assessment in predicting the outcome in patients with colorectal liver metastases treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by liver surgery. , 2006, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[24]  C. V. D. van de Velde,et al.  Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  H. Höfler,et al.  Histomorphology and grading of regression in gastric carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy , 2003, Cancer.

[26]  C. Aring,et al.  A CRITICAL REVIEW , 1939, Journal of neurology and psychiatry.

[27]  D. Brizel,et al.  National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology , 2012 .

[28]  A. Jemal,et al.  Global cancer statistics , 2011, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[29]  L. Schwartz,et al.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). , 2009, European journal of cancer.