Peritoneal cytology has been used as a part of the cancer staging of gastric cancer patients. The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the value of peritoneal cytology as part of the staging of gastric cancer and survival prediction. The second aim was to establish if positive cytology may be modified by neoadjuvant therapy, to improve prognosis.
Methods
An electronic literature search was performed using Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases up to January 2016. The logarithm of the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was used as the primary summary statistic. Comparative studies were used, and the outcome measure was survival in three groups: (1) positive versus negative cytology at staging laparoscopy immediately preceding surgery; (2) effect of neoadjuvant therapy on cytology and survival; and (3) positive cytology in the absence of macroscopic peritoneal disease was compared with obvious macroscopic peritoneal disease.
Results
Pooled analysis demonstrated that positive cytology was associated with significantly reduced overall survival (HR, 3.46; 95% CI, 2.77–4.31; P < 0.0001). Interestingly, negative cytology following neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with significantly improved overall survival (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.31–0.57; P < 0.0001). The absence of macroscopic peritoneal disease with positive cytology was associated with significantly improved overall survival (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.56–0.73; P < 0.0001).
Conclusion
This study suggests that patients with initial positive cytology may have a good prognosis following neoadjuvant treatment if the cytology results change to negative after treatment.
Introduction
The main treatment of advanced nonmetastatic gastric cancer is surgical resection with perioperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy [1, 2]. Efforts to prolong survival in metastatic gastric cancer have showed little improvement [1, 2]. Accurate staging of gastric cancer is crucial in selecting the appropriate treatment option, whether curative or palliative. The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association included the results of cytological examination of peritoneal lavage fluid as a key prognostic factor in their classification of gastric carcinoma [1, 3]. However, recently published guidelines suggested that cytology-positive status in the absence of other noncurative factors, that is, macroscopic disease, can be managed with D2 gastrectomy and perioperative chemotherapy [4]. Initial data of those treated with surgery alone showed poor 5-year survival; however, more recent publications have shown that the use of postoperative chemotherapy improves overall survival rates to 26%, [5, 6]. On the other hand, if the information on cytology status were available before surgery, a chemotherapy-first strategy could be taken whereby patients whose cytology status turned negative could be preferentially treated with curative surgery [7, 8].
The incidence of positive peritoneal cytology for patients with gastric cancer varies, in published reports, from 4% to 41% [9]. Peritoneal washings positive for cancer cells have been demonstrated to correlate with the extent of cancer (T1/T2, 0%; T3/T4, 10%; M+, 59%) [10] and have been considered as stage IV disease [11]. The influence of positive cytology on survival has been shown as a powerful independent predictor of survival when compared to other postoperative pathological variables such as the tumor serosal invasion or lymph node involvement [2, 6, 12, 13]. Positive cytology was shown to be the most powerful predictor of outcome, with a risk ratio of 2.7 for patients undergoing curative resection [2]. Furthermore, studies have also shown that the number and arrangement of cytology-positive cells have an effect on survival at the time of gastrectomy [10, 12].
Anzeige
The results of the randomized controlled trial by the apan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG 0705) and Korea Gastric Cancer Association (KGCA01), comparing gastrectomy plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in advanced gastric cancer with a single noncurable factor, showed no advantage of resecting the primary gastric cancer in the presence of peritoneal metastasis [11]. Nevertheless, the treatment recommendations for gastric cancer in the event of positive cytology range from palliative chemotherapy to attempts at neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgical resection [4, 14].
The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of peritoneal cytology as part of the staging of gastric cancer and survival prediction. The secondary aim is to establish if positive cytology may be modified by neoadjuvant therapy to improve prognosis.
Methods
Literature search strategy
An electronic literature search was undertaken using Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases up to January 2016. The search terms ‘gastric cancer,’ ‘laparoscopy,’ ‘peritoneal cytology,’ ‘cancer staging,’ and ‘prognosis,’ and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) ‘stomach neoplasms,’ ‘neoplasm metastasis,’ ‘laparoscopy,’ and ‘cytology’ were used in combination with the Boolean operators AND or OR (Fig. 1). Two authors (S.J. and S.R.M.) performed the electronic search independently in January 2016. The electronic search was supplemented by a hand-search of published abstracts from meetings of the Society of Academic and Research Surgery, Digestive Disease Week, the Association of Upper Gastro-Intestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology for 2005–2015. The reference lists of articles obtained were also searched to identify further relevant citations; as was the Current Controlled Trials Register (http://www.controlled-trials.com). Abstracts of the articles identified by the electronic search were scrutinized by two of the authors (S.J. and S.R.M.) to determine their suitability for inclusion in the pooled analysis. Any discordances regarding study inclusion between these two authors were settled in discussion with a third independent author (A.A.). The quality of evidence provided by each study was evaluated using the Oxford levels of evidence-based medicine scoring system (http://www.cebm.net/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009).
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram of literature search in this meta-analysis
×
Publications were included in this review if they meet the following criteria:
Studies concerning patients with gastric cancer
Comparative studies of patients with positive and negative peritoneal cytology
Comparative studies evaluating the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy upon patients with positive cytology from gastric cancer
Comparative studies of patients with positive peritoneal cytology in the absence of macroscopic peritoneal disease and patients with macroscopic peritoneal disease.
Anzeige
Publications were excluded if they met any of the following criteria:
Studies published in a language other than English
Case reports or cohort studies including fewer than ten patients
Noncomparative studies or studies not concerning peritoneal cytology and gastric cancer.
In the situation in which authors from the same institution had published a primary paper and then an updated analysis with a larger patient cohort, the most recent publication was included in the analysis.
Outcome measures for meta-analysis of comparative studies
The primary outcome measure evaluated was the hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival. Three comparisons were made:
1.
Positive versus negative cytology at staging laparoscopy immediately preceding surgery.
2.
Initially positive cytology that became negative following neoadjuvant therapy was compared with positive cytology that remained positive despite neoadjuvant therapy.
3.
Positive cytology in the absence of macroscopic peritoneal disease was compared with obviously macroscopic peritoneal disease.
Statistical analysis
The logarithm of the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was used as the primary summary statistic. To estimate HR and its variance, this was extracted from the study directly or required additional calculation depending on the method of data being presented: annual mortality rates, survival curves, number of deaths, or percentage of freedom from death [15].
Meta-analysis of data was conducted using a random effects model. Publication bias was explored graphically with funnel plots to detect asymmetry and any outliers. Interstudy heterogeneity was assessed using the chi-square statistic and the I2 value to measure the degree of variation not attributable to chance alone: this was graded as low (I2 < 25%), moderate (I2 = 25–75%), or high (I2 > 75%). The significance level was set at P < 0.05. Calculations were performed by G.M. and verified by T.A. This study was performed in line with Cochrane recommendations, following the MOOSE guidelines, using appropriate statistical software (STATA/SE12) [16].
Results
Patient demographics
The total number of patients included in this meta-analysis was 7970, with a male to female ratio of 1:1.6 (Table 1). The tumor demographics have been described for each group: negative versus positive cytology (Table 2).
Table 1
Demographics of patients with cytology-positive (Cyt +ve) and cytology-negative (Cyt −ve) results
Study
Total patients
F:M ratio
Median age
Age range
No. patients
Cyt +ve
Recurrence
No. patients
Cyt −ve
Recurrence
Comorbidities
Comorbidities
Badgwell
381
1/1.8
61
24–88
39
223
Bentrem
371
1/1.2
67
21–88
24
347
Brito
72
1/1.8
60.4
47.1–73.7
8
64
Chuwa
142
1/1.8
36
17
6
1C6
17
6
Euanoraster
97
1/1.8
22
22
75
22
Fukagawa
996
1/1.1
225
541
Jiang
139
57
28–80
38
31
101
31
Kang
75
1.2.1
7
6
68
6
Katsuragi
124
1/2.1
26
32
39
32
Kodera
70
13
22
La Torre
64
01/01/01
64.5
29–84
7
57
Lee
1072
172
900
Makino
113
1/2.1
35
78
de Manzon
168
1/1.7
145
23
Miyashiro
417
1/0.6
61
27–87
25
295
Nakagawa
100
1/0.6
62
28–83
9
30
Noda
1474
1/1.9
91
1383
Ribeiro
201
1/2.2
15
186
Rosenberg
351
1/1.65
74
272
Wong
38
31
125
Total
6465
1042
4935
Table 2
Pathological features of gastric cancer in both positive cytology (a) and negative cytology (b)
Nodal involvement
Primary tumor
(Clinical T disease)
Tumor differentiation
Histological type
Angiolymphatic invasion
T1–T2
T3–T4
Differentiated
Poorly differentiated
Intestinal
Diffuse
(a) Positive cytology
Badgwel
6
30
Bentrem
150
4
19
Brito
5
0–2(5), 3–4 (37)
5
3
5
Chuwa
28
0
36
Euanoraster
22
14
2
20
18
Fukagawa
234
307
Jiang
29
3
35
14
24
18
20
17
Kang
5
0
7
1
6
Katsuragi
34
5
41
14
11
Kodera
20
2
20
La Torre
7
1
6
Lee
105
6
102
31
141
37
55
Makino
28
35
5
30
de Manzoni
13
0
23
9
14
Miyashiro
25
10
15
7
18
Nakagawa
Noda
88
2
89
33
58
41
Riheiro
14
0
15
6
9
Rosenberg
57
36
38
Wong
2
0
2
1
1
1
1
4
(b) Negative cytology
Badgwel
45
165
Bentrem
14
172
48
Brito
42
5
3
36
26
Chuwa
44
46
60
24
Euanoraster
61
14
61
25
50
Fukagawa
6
13
21
Jiang
53
40
61
41
60
46
55
Kang
46
23
45
25
43
14
Katsuragi
46
47
23
33
37
Kodera
29
6
31
La Torre
36
39
18
Lee
648
368
429
271
629
359
367
Makino
49
78
35
43
de Manzoni
77
78
67
83
62
Miyashiro
Nakagawa
559
Noda
977
411
972
577
806
Ribeiro
131
66
120
85
101
Rosenberg
114
223
49
Wong
Meta-analysis
Positive versus negative cytology
Pooled analysis of 21 studies [2, 3, 5, 9, 17‐34] included 6499 patients in total, 1052 in the positive and 4948 in the negative cytology group at staging laparoscopy. The median follow-up period ranged from 24 to 140 months. This pooled analysis demonstrated that positive cytology was associated with a significantly reduced overall survival (HR, 3.46; 95% CI, 2.77–4.31; P < 0.0001) (Fig. 2). There was evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity for this result (I2 = 84.1%).
Fig. 2
Forrest plot of pooled analysis demonstrated that positive cytology results were associated with significantly reduced overall survival (HR, 3.46; 95% CI, 2.77–4.31; P < 0.0001)
×
Following neoadjuvant therapy: positive versus negative cytology
Pooled analysis of five studies [7, 24, 35‐37] included 519 patients in total; 73 in the positive cytology and 139 in the negative cytology group. The median follow-up period ranged from 60 to 84 months. This pooled analysis demonstrated that negative cytology following neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with significantly improved overall survival (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.31–0.57; P < 0.0001) (Fig. 3). There was evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity for this result (I2 = 62.5%).
Fig. 3
Forrest plot for pooled analysis demonstrated that negative cytology results following neoadjuvant chemotherapy were associated with significantly improved overall survival (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.31–0.57; P < 0.0001)
×
Positive cytology versus macroscopic peritoneal disease
Pooled analysis of seven studies [3, 7, 9, 17, 20, 25] included 1035 patients in total, 465 in the positive cytology and 537 in the macroscopic peritoneal disease group. The median follow-up period ranged from 36 to 120 months. This pooled analysis demonstrated that positive cytology in the absence of macroscopic peritoneal disease was associated with a significantly improved overall survival (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.56–0.73; P < 0.0001) (Fig. 4). There was no evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity for this result (I2 = 0%).
Fig. 4
Pooled analysis demonstrated that positive cytology in the absence of macroscopic peritoneal disease was associated with significantly improved overall survival (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.56–0.73; P < 0.0001)
×
Bias exploration/sensitivity analyses
Funnel plots were created for combined and subgroup analysis for the various factors to visually assess the publication bias; these demonstrated symmetry. To determine the influence of each study’s individual dataset, we performed sensitivity analyses for the subgroups as described. A single study involved in the pooled meta-analysis was excluded each time, and the corresponding HR was not changed noticeably (data not shown).
Discussion
This meta-analysis has demonstrated negative peritoneal cytology before treatment improves survival rate when compared with positive cytology. Cytology should be considered a modifiable factor as it was found in this meta-analysis, that the change in cytology status from a positive to negative result following chemotherapy was shown to carry an improvement in overall survival. Furthermore, although positive cytology is considered stage IV disease, the prognosis and overall survival associated with positive cytology versus macroscopic peritoneal metastasis are not equivalent [31]. Fujiwara et al. have shown that the change in cytology status to negative following receiving neo-adjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy and systemic chemotherapy improved prognosis [37]. It is worth noting that although Lorenzen et al. have also shown that the change in cytological status to negative following chemotherapy led to improved prognosis, almost 25% with negative cytology became positive following chemotherapy, thus worsening their prognosis and outcome [36]. The prediction of response of patients to neoadjuvant therapy as assessed by cytology remains a challenging area for future research to provide patient- and tumor-targeted therapy.
Anzeige
Regarding peritoneal disease, this meta-analysis has shown that positive cytology alone carries better survival compared with macroscopic peritoneal dissemination. Although survival with no treatment can be similar between these two groups, the use of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy was shown to improve the 3-year overall survival from 0% in gross peritoneal disease to 12% in positive cytology with no overt peritoneal disease [9]. Therefore, the concept that positive cytology is a potentially modifiable factor is further supported. Interestingly, Miyashiro et al. also studied the number of cancer cells detected in cytology studies versus peritoneal metastasis and found that when a higher number of cells was detected, survival was similar to those with peritoneal metastasis [3]. There was insufficient evidence available to define a threshold of positive cancer cells from cytology that changed survival from this review, which remains an important area for future research.
There are a number of limitations to this systematic review and meta-analysis that need to be acknowledged. First, the lack of randomized control trials (RCTs) that met the inclusion criteria is therefore reducing the power of the analyses. Second, only studies in the English-language literature were included, so it is possible that relevant studies in other languages will be identified in the future. Also, patient demographics and co-morbidities were not reported in all the included studies.
In conclusion, the results of this meta-analysis support the importance of peritoneal cytology results in the assessment of gastric cancer patients. We have shown that negative cytology and the change in cytological status from positive to negative improve survival in gastric cancer. This knowledge justifies the notion to reconsider the presence of positive peritoneal cytology as an absolute indication for palliative intent of treatment without further consideration to changing status following chemotherapy (Fig. 5). The change of initial positive cytology to negative subsequent to treatment should be the subject of a prospective large-scale multicenter study that examines long-term survival benefits.
Fig. 5
Management algorithm for gastric cancer patients depending on their cytology status and response to chemotherapy
×
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
No funding sources were used in the preparation of this manuscript, and the authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Anzeige
Ethical approval
No ethical approval or informed consent statement was required for this review article.
Sources of funding
Sheraz R. Markar is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Mit e.Med Innere Medizin erhalten Sie Zugang zu CME-Fortbildungen des Fachgebietes Innere Medizin, den Premium-Inhalten der internistischen Fachzeitschriften, inklusive einer gedruckten internistischen Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl.
Die Therapie von Echinokokkosen sollte immer in spezialisierten Zentren erfolgen. Eine symptomlose Echinokokkose kann – egal ob von Hunde- oder Fuchsbandwurm ausgelöst – konservativ erfolgen. Wenn eine Op. nötig ist, kann es sinnvoll sein, vorher Zysten zu leeren und zu desinfizieren.
Der OP in der Zukunft wird mit weniger Personal auskommen – nicht, weil die Technik das medizinische Fachpersonal verdrängt, sondern weil der Personalmangel es nötig macht.
Seit November 2023 gibt es evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen zum perioperativen Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT) auf S3-Niveau. Vieles wird schon entsprechend der Empfehlungen durchgeführt. Wo es im Alltag noch hapert, zeigt eine Umfrage in einem Klinikverbund.
Auch wenn sich Krankenhäuser nachhaltig und grün geben – sie tragen aktuell erheblich zu den CO2-Emissionen bei und produzieren jede Menge Müll. Ein Pilotprojekt aus Bonn zeigt, dass viele Op.-Abfälle wiederverwertet werden können.
Update Chirurgie
Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletterund bleiben Sie gut informiert.
Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.
Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.
