|
Influential factors on survival in gastric cancer: A single-center study
Ghodratollah Roshanaei1, Azadeh Kiumarsi2, Amir Kasaeian3, Malihe Safari4, Mohammad Abbasi5, Ali Rahimi6
1 Modeling of Noncommunicable Diseases Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences; Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
2 Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation Research Center, Research Institute for Oncology, Hematology, and Cell Therapy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation Research Center, Research Institute for Oncology, Hematology, and Cell Therapy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences; Digestive Diseases Research Center, Digestive Diseases Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences; Inflammation Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4 Modeling of Noncommunicable Diseases Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
5 Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
6 English Department, School of Social Sciences and Languages, VIT University, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
| Date of Submission | 15-Feb-2021 |
| Date of Decision | 18-May-2021 |
| Date of Acceptance | 24-Sep-2021 |
| Date of Web Publication | 17-Mar-2022 |
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Amir Kasaeian
Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation Research Center, Research Institute for Oncology, Hematology, and Cell Therapy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Shariati Hospital, North Kargar Ave., Tehran
Iran
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/jrms.JRMS_1286_20
Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the conspicuous causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Considering the mounting incidence of this cancer in developing countries such as Iran, determining the influential factors on the survival of involved patients is noteworthy. Hence, we aimed to ascertain the survival rates and the prognostic factors in our GC patients. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, data of 314 patients with GC in a referral cancer center in Hamadan province of Iran were studied. The outcome of our study was survival time and the influential factors were gender, age at diagnosis, tumor history, tumor grade, surgery history, radiotherapy history, stage of disease, metastasis history, and lymph node involvement. Kaplan − Meier method and log-rank test were used for the calculation and comparing the survival curves and Cox-proportional hazard model was used for the multivariable analysis of prognostic factors. Results: In a total of 314 GC patients, the median age at the diagnosis was 63 years (range: 21–92) with most patients (74.84%) being males. The median follow-up time was 2.42 years, and the median survival time was 2 years. The multivariable cox analysis of overall survival (OS) indicated that having distant metastasis increased the hazard of death by about 2.5 times (P < 0.0001, heart rates [HR]: 2.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.71, 3.75]), and receiving surgery as treatment, decreased the hazard of death up to 36% (P = 0.02, HR: 0.64, 95%CI: [0.46–0.89]). The other variables did not have any significant effects on the OS. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that lower survival (greater hazard of death) strongly and significantly associated with having distant metastasis in patients with GC and receiving surgery could significantly decrease the hazard of death in these patients instead.
Keywords: Cox analysis, distant metastasis, gastric cancer, multivariable, overall survival
How to cite this article:
Roshanaei G, Kiumarsi A, Kasaeian A, Safari M, Abbasi M, Rahimi A. Influential factors on survival in gastric cancer: A single-center study. J Res Med Sci 2022;27:19 |
How to cite this URL:
Roshanaei G, Kiumarsi A, Kasaeian A, Safari M, Abbasi M, Rahimi A. Influential factors on survival in gastric cancer: A single-center study. J Res Med Sci [serial online] 2022 [cited 2023 Mar 29];27:19. Available from: https://www.jmsjournal.net/text.asp?2022/27/1/19/339775 |
| Introduction | |  |
Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth most common malignancy and one of the main causes of death due to malignancies worldwide.[1],[2] There is substantial geographic variation in the mortality rates of GC, with the highest rates in developing countries.[3] In the last decade, studies have reported that survival rates in Iran are consistent with those in other developing countries, estimated to be about 12 per 100,000 population.[4] Population-based data on survival rates in gastrointestinal malignancies facilitate precise assessment of the disease impact on community health and aids health-care planning in future. On the other hand, as a life span similar to the general population is anticipated in the surviving cancer patients 5 years after diagnosis,[5] estimation of the 1, 3, and 5-year survival rates could be decisive for assessing and establishing the initial treatment, follow-up duration, and point of therapy termination. Moreover, clinicopathological properties of GC as the main prognostic factors including the WHO histopathological type, size of the tumor, pathologic grade, invasion through the gastric wall, vascular invasion, and lymph node involvement, could guide the oncologists for treatment plan designing.[6] Besides, regional factors seem to influence prognosis in GC, so reporting the prognostic factors from different geographical regions could positively add in to the literature. Hence, in this study, we have considered a cohort of patients with GC in Hamadan province of Iran and reported their 1-, 3-, and 5-years overall survival (OS) rates. In addition, we have used univariable and multivariable analyses to assess the prognostic potential of clinicopathological properties of the tumor on survival probability in this population.
| Materials And Methods | | |
This study was conducted in Imam Khomeini cancer clinic (a referral cancer clinic affiliated by Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran). We retrospectively tracked all cases of GC referred to our clinic in a 10-year period, from March 2009 to March 2019. All the data were fully anonymized in our data bank, and all patients were followed until the end of 2019 to update their survival status. Data regarding to the contributing factors including gender, age at diagnosis, tumor history, tumor grade, surgery history, radiotherapy history, stage of disease, metastasis history, lymph node involvement, survival status, and survival time were extracted. All influential factors were categorical by their nature except the age at the diagnosis that we categorized it based on the expert opinions. OS time measured from the time of diagnosis to the time of death, or the last contact in surviving patients. The inclusion criteria included definitive pathological diagnosis of GC and being native to Hamadan province. Lack of cooperation to complete survival information and major defects in the patient's medical record considered as exclusion criteria. Furthermore, all patients with two primary cancers simultaneously were excluded from the study. The primary cases were 350 that only 314 included in the study based on the mentioned criteria.
This research was approved by the Ethics Committee of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences.
Ethical considerations
The general (and not personal) information on the patients has been used in this study. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences (IR.UMSHA.REC.1399.456).
Statistical analysis
The data were analyzed retrospectively. Patients who were followed beyond 5 years were censored to improve the comparison between different groups as significant differences between follow-up periods could seriously bias the results. The Chi-squared test was used to compare the categorical variables between dead and alive patients. OS was measured from the time of diagnosis to the time of death, or the last visit/contact in surviving patients. Kaplan − Meier method was derived to calculate the OS and the log-rank Chi-squared test was used to compare the OS among different categories of each predictors. The median follow-up time was calculated using reverse Kaplan − Meier method. We did not have any documented data about patients' disease recurrence, so we were unable to determine the disease-free survival.
The effects of covariates on OS were analyzed through cox proportional hazard model. Variables with a P < 0.2 in univariable models were entered the multivariable analysis. Because of the strong association between metastasis and disease stage (causing collinearity in Cox PH modeling), we fitted the multivariable Cox model with metastasis as we believe it is the more important than disease stage. Nonetheless, we showed the univariable analysis of disease stage. The assumption of hazard proportionality was checked through Schoenfeld residuals (results not shown).
All analyses were done using STATA version 11.2 (StataCorp. College Station, TX, USA). P < 0.05 was considered significant in all statistical analyses.
| Results | | |
Patient characteristics
We retrospectively analyzed 314 cases of GC in our cohort. The median age at diagnosis was 63 years (range, 21–92 years) with most patients (74.84%) being males.
Regarding to the pathological classification, 284 (90.45%) patients had adenocarcinoma, and 175 (77.43%) patients were detected at the clinical stage IV.
Overall, 42.36% of patients received surgical resection, and 100% of patients received at least one cycle of chemotherapy in our clinic and 79.62% received radiotherapy. In general, about half of the whole patients (48.73%) were died up to the end of study which is 5th year of follow-up, but among 176 patients who were metastatic at diagnosis, 110 (62.5%) patients had died (P < 0.001). Among 77 patients who had lymph node involvement at diagnosis, 45 (58.44%) had died (P = 0.05). The characteristics of patients are presented in [Table 1]. | Table 1: Demographic and clinical characteristics of gastric cancer patients
Click here to view |
Survival analyses
In this study, the median follow-up time was 2.42 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.08–3.17), and the median survival time was 2 years (95% CI: 1.58–2.58). [Table 2] summarizes the 1-, 3-, and 5-year rates of OS, and [Table 3] reveals the association of different variables with OS by univariable and multivariable analyses. The whole patients' OS curve portrayed in [Figure 1]a. Of note, the univariable and multivariable analyses limited to those patients who had tumor. This means that those 30 patients without any tumor excluded from these sets of modeling. The factors bearing significant association with increased survival in univariable analyses included receiving surgery (P = 0.001) and radiotherapy (P = 0.009). Higher clinical stage of the disease, aged more than 75 compared to 50 or less at diagnosis (P = 0.04), and having metastasis at diagnosis were associated with significantly decreased OS (P < 0.0001). Among other variables, sex and lymph node involvement also entered the multivariable model as they have P < 0.2. | Table 3: Univariable and multivariable cox regression of prognostic factors
Click here to view |
 | Figure 1: (a) Overall survival of all patients, (b) adjusted overall survival of all patients based on metastasis status and (c) adjusted overall survival of all patients based on surgery
Click here to view |
On the multivariable analysis, as the two variables including disease stage and metastasis, not only had significant effect in the univariable analysis, but also had a high association with each other (P < 0.001), in order to hinder the problem of collinearity, we only entered distant metastasis (considering its importance) in the multivariable analysis and ignored the disease stage accordingly. The multivariable Cox regression analysis of OS indicated that having distant metastasis increased the hazard of death by about 2.5 times (P < 0.0001, heart rates [HR]: 2.53, 95% CI: [1.71, 3.75]), and receiving surgery as treatment, decreased the hazard of death up to 36% (P = 0.02, HR: 0.64, 95%CI: [0.46–0.89]). The other variables did not have any significant effects on the OS at the 0.05 level of significance. [Figure 1]b shows the adjusted OS of patients in the multivariable Cox model, indicating that the adjusted median survival of patients with metastasis was 1.08 years while the adjusted median survival of patients without metastasis was more than three times (i.e., 3.25 years). [Figure 1]c also shows the adjusted median survival of patients who had not had surgery is a bit more than 3 years while the adjusted median survival of patients who had surgery was exactly 5 years.
| Discussion | | |
GC is remained to be a major public health issue worldwide and has been one of the main causes of mortality due to cancer in the 21st century.[7] The prognosis in this type of cancer is poor, and its 5-year survival rate is reported to be 10%–40% in most countries, and about 20% in developing countries. Cancer survival rates could be used as indicators for assessing the prerequisites of cancer management in the health-care system. Moreover, pointing out the pathoclinical characteristics affecting the survival rates in GC patients could assist specialists in the process of treatment planning. This study reports the OS of GC patients and evaluates the association between their survival rates and the potential prognostic factors such as age at diagnosis, sex, tumor grade, clinical stage, lymph node involvement, and distant metastasis. In Iran, the reported 5-year survival is about 28%.[8] In our study, the 5-year OS was 32.21%, which is higher than what it was reported in other studies.[9],[10],[11] In some studies,[12],[13] female patients are reported to have better survival rates; however, in our study, although women had better 5-years OS, the difference of their OS with male patients was not significant. The highest survival rate is observed in patients aged <50 years of age.[10],[14] Advanced age at the diagnosis is a significant prognostic factor and our findings were similar to the previous reports indicating worse survival for older patients.[15] Delay in the diagnosis of older patients could be an explanation for the lower survival in advanced age. In our study, comparable to other studies, the histologic type in most patients was adenocarcinoma. In the study by Safari M et al.,[16] adenocarcinoma was detected in 89.6% of patients and in the study by Akhondi-Meybodi et al.,[14] 94% had adenocarcinoma. Most studies agree that survival rate for adenocarcinoma is lower than other histologic types,[17] which was also confirmed by our results. Our study showed that the advanced clinical stage of tumor was a significant factor which affected the survival probability of patients in both univariable and multivariable analysis. This finding was similar to other studies which also pointed out a higher hazard of death for patients with advanced stage of the tumor.[12],[17],[18] Distant metastasis is an important prognostic factor and many studies have shown that survival depends on the presence of metastasis.[11],[19],[20],[21]
The results in both univariable and multivariable analyses in our study indicated a higher risk of death and a lower survival rate in patients with distant metastasis.
Surgery is the back bone treatment for GC, offering the best chance of cure, with 5-year survival of 50%–70%.[22] In our study, 5-year survival rate was significantly higher in patients who had undergone surgery compared to those receiving no surgical management. Surgery was reported to increase the 5-year survival rate from 47% to 54% in some studies.[23]
In our study, this raise was from 25% to 40%, this could be explained by the fact that can be explained by the fact that those who underwent surgery had been in lower stages; however, in multivariable analysis, we demonstrated that receiving surgery as a treatment could decreased the hazard of death up to 36%. On the other hand, in our patients, the 5-year survival rate was also significantly influenced by receiving radiotherapy, this was dissimilar to the findings of other studies. Akhondi-Meybodi et al. reported that the 5-year survival rate by radiotherapy was 9% compared with 19% in patients not receiving radiotherapy as their treatment.[14] This lower survival rate was explicated by the toxicity of radiotherapy. Some research have shown no significant association between radiotherapy and survival rate.[24],[25],[26],[27] Conversely, in our patients, radiotherapy increased the 5-year survival rate 10%.
The advantage of the present study is having a great number of follow-up population, but its limitations are being a retrospective study in a single institution, and not having a prespecified protocol before conducting the exploratory analyses. Therefore, we certainly suggest further research for clarifying the relationship between the clinicopathological markers and their prognostic effect on the survival of GC patients.
| Conclusion | | |
The results of this study showed that lower survival (greater hazard of death) is strongly and significantly associated with having distant metastasis in patients with GC adjusting for other patients characteristics and receiving surgery could significantly improve the survival (decrease the hazard of death) in these patients instead all over again adjusting for other patients characteristics.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank of Vice-Chancellor of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences for their constructive aid in managing the patients (specific Ethics ID code: IR.UMSHA.REC.1399.456, proposal no: 9906113709).
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References | | |
| 1. | Wright NA, Poulsom R, Stamp G, Van Noorden S, Sarraf C, Elia G, et al. Trefoil peptide gene expression in gastrointestinal epithelial cells in inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 1993;104:12-20.  |
| 2. | Modarres S, Younesi H, Naghshineh A. Determination of the frequency of different blood types in patients with stomach cancer referring to Shahid Beheshti hospital during 2006-2011. J Babol Univ Med Sci 2015;17:63-7. |
| 3. | Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011;61:69-90. |
| 4. | Modarres SR, Gholizadeh-Pasha A, Khatibi S, Siadati S. Estimating postoperative survival rate of gastric cancer patients and its effective factors in Babol, northern Iran: 2006-2011. Caspian J Intern Med 2017;8:190-5. |
| 5. | Pisani P, Bray F, Parkin DM. Estimates of the world-wide prevalence of cancer for 25 sites in the adult population. Int J Cancer 2002;97:72-81. |
| 6. | Yasui W, Sentani K, Sakamoto N, Anami K, Naito Y, Oue N. Molecular pathology of gastric cancer: Research and practice. Pathol Res Pract 2011;207:608-12. |
| 7. | Eghdami A, Ostovar R, Jafari A, Palmer AJ, Bordbar N, Ravangard R. Economic burden of gastric cancer: A case of Iran. Cancer Control 2019;26:1073274819837185. |
| 8. | Zeraati H, Amiri Z. Estimating postoperative survival of gastric cancer patients and factors affecting it in Iran: Based on a TNM-7 Staging System. Acta Med Iran 2016;54:114-8. |
| 9. | Roshanaei G, Kazemnejad A, Sadighi S. Survival estimating following recurrence in gastric cancer patients and its relative factors. Koomesh 2011;12:223-8. |
| 10. | Roshanaei GH, Safari M, Baghestani AR, Sadighi S. Assessment of the survival risk factors in patients with gastric cancer in cancer institute of Imam Khomeni hospital between 2003-2007. J Adv Med Biomed Res 2012;20:40-50. |
| 11. | Roshanaei G, Rostampour F, Javadi M, Behnoud S, Sabouri Ghannad M. Determination of risk factors affecting survival of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma in Hamadan, Iran. Middle East J Cancer 2016;7:125-9. |
| 12. | Roshanaei G, Ghannad MS, Jafarabadi MA, Faradmal J, Sadighi S. Prognostic impact of risk factors in patients with gastric cancer in Iran. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2011;12:3005-8. |
| 13. | Roshanaei G, Seddighi S, Safari M, Faradmal J. Estimated survival time in gastric cancer patients and its associated factors. Koomesh 2012;14:47-54. |
| 14. | Akhondi-Meybodi M, Ghane M, Akhondi-Meybodi S, Dashti G. Five-year survival rate for gastric cancer in Yazd Province, Central Iran, from 2001 to 2008. Middle East J Dig Dis 2017;9:39-48. |
| 15. | Damhuis RA, Tilanus HW. The influence of age on resection rates and postoperative mortality in 2773 patients with gastric cancer. Eur J Cancer 1995;31A: 928-31. |
| 16. | Safari M, Abbasi M, Gohari Ensaf F, Berangi Z, Roshanaei GH. Identification of factors affecting metastatic gastric cancer patients' survival using the random survival forest and comparison with cox regression model. Iran J Epidemiol 2020;15:343-51. |
| 17. | Manfè AZ, Segalina P, Maffei Faccioli A. Prognostic factors in gastric cancer. Our experience and review of the literature. Minerva Chir 2000;55:299-305. |
| 18. | Biglarian A, Hajizadeh E, Kazemnejad A, Zali M. Survival analysis of gastric cancer patients using Cox model: A five year study. Tehran Univ Med J 2009;67:317-25. |
| 19. | Shiraishi N, Inomata M, Osawa N, Yasuda K, Adachi Y, Kitano S. Early and late recurrence after gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma. Univariate and multivariate analyses. Cancer 2000;89:255-61. |
| 20. | Orsenigo E, Carlucci M, Braga M, Tomajer V, Di Palo S, Tamburini A, et al. Prognostic factors of gastric neoplasms: Experience with 1,074 cases undergoing surgical treatment at a single center. Suppl Tumori 2005;4:S86-7. |
| 21. | Costa ML, de Cássia Braga Ribeiro K, Machado MA, Costa AC, Montagnini AL. Prognostic score in gastric cancer: The importance of a conjoint analysis of clinical, pathologic, and therapeutic factors. Ann Surg Oncol 2006;13:843-50. |
| 22. | Durães C, Almeida GM, Seruca R, Oliveira C, Carneiro F. Biomarkers for gastric cancer: Prognostic, predictive or targets of therapy? Virchows Arch 2014;464:367-78. |
| 23. | Hundahl SA, Phillips JL, Menck HR. The National Cancer Data Base Report on poor survival of U.S. gastric carcinoma patients treated with gastrectomy: Fifth Edition American Joint Committee on Cancer staging, proximal disease, and the “different disease” hypothesis. Cancer 2000;88:921-32. |
| 24. | Landry J, Tepper JE, Wood WC, Moulton EO, Koerner F, Sullinger J. Patterns of failure following curative resection of gastric carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1990;19:1357-62. |
| 25. | Dassen AE, Lemmens VE, van de Poll-Franse LV, Creemers GJ, Brenninkmeijer SJ, Lips DJ, et al. Trends in incidence, treatment and survival of gastric adenocarcinoma between 1990 and 2007: A population-based study in the Netherlands. Eur J Cancer 2010;46:1101-10. |
| 26. | Fiorica F, Cartei F, Enea M, Licata A, Cabibbo G, Carau B, et al. The impact of radiotherapy on survival in resectable gastric carcinoma: A meta-analysis of literature data. Cancer Treat Rev 2007;33:729-40. |
| 27. | Cuschieri A, Weeden S, Fielding J, Bancewicz J, Craven J, Joypaul V, et al. Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: Long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. Surgical Co-operative Group. Br J Cancer 1999;79:1522-30. |
[Figure 1]
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]
|
Search Pubmed for