|
 
 |
| PRACTICE CHANGING CONTINUING EDUCATION: GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY |
|
| Year : 2014 | Volume
: 1
| Issue : 1 | Page : 41-49 |
|
Current strategies in the diagnosis and management of resectable gastric adenocarcinoma
Savio G Barreto
Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Gastrointestinal Oncology, and Bariatric Surgery, Medanta Institute of Digestive and Hepatobiliary Sciences, India
| Date of Web Publication | 3-May-2014 |
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Savio G Barreto
Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Gastrointestinal Oncology, and Bariatric Surgery, Medanta Institute of Digestive and Hepatobiliary Sciences, Medanta, The Medicity, Sector 38, Gurgaon, Haryana
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/2349-0977.131861
Gastric cancer is generally associated with a dismal outcome. One of the major reasons for this is the fact that patients often ignore the early symptoms of the disease, which masquerade benign diseases such as reflux disease and gastritis, and hence present when the cancer is advanced or metastatic. Multidisciplinary management has emerged as an important determinant of outcomes in patients with gastric cancer. Complete surgical resection remains the cornerstone if cure is to be achieved, especially in those patients with non-metastatic disease. This article provides an updated review of the multidisciplinary management of patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma. Keywords: D2 lymphadenectomy; morbidity; mortality; radical
How to cite this article:
Barreto SG. Current strategies in the diagnosis and management of resectable gastric adenocarcinoma. Astrocyte 2014;1:41-9 |
Savio G. Barreto∗
(∗Member, ICMR Gastric Cancer Task Force)
| Introduction | |  |
The incidence of gastric cancer in the whole of India is not as high as some of the other regions of the world, such as Eastern Asia, Eastern Europe, and South America, [1] except for the North Eastern states, such as Mizoram and Sikkim. [2],[3],[4],[5],[6] However, gastric cancer has been reported to be among the five most common cancers affecting young Indian men and women (age, 15-44 years). [7] Additionally, it has been found to be the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths among Indian men and women. [8] A multidisciplinary approach that encompasses medical and surgical gastroenterologists, as well as medical and radiation oncologists has emerged as the cornerstone in achieving the best outcome for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Thus, the dissemination of knowledge of the appropriate treatment approach is essential. This article provides an evidence-based review of the existing literature with respect to the evaluation and management of patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma or cancer, with or without lymph nodes, and no distant metastases.
| Etiology | | |
Factors associated with the development of gastric cancer are largely lifestyle-related, including diet, smoking, and alcohol. Infections (such as Helicobacter pylori), too, have been reported, although inconsistently.
- Diet: Salt intake has been consistently linked with the increased risk for developing gastric cancer [9] possibly related to the chronic inflammation causing chronic atrophic gastritis. [10] On the other hand, fruits and vegetables are associated with a reduced risk of gastric cancer. In Kashmir, the consumption of "salted tea" has been postulated to predispose to the development of gastric cancer. [11] Preserved and pickled foods are also notorious for predisposing an individual to the development of gastric cancer. However, the continued consumption of fermented foods as well as salted and smoked fried meat and dried, smoked, and preserved meat in Sikkim [4] may be the cause for the high incidence of gastric cancer noted there. In fact, the use of refrigeration has been touted to be one of the important causes for the worldwide reduction in the incidence of gastric cancer [12] in the last 50 years.
- Smoking and alcohol: Tobacco is a known risk factor for gastric cancer. [13] The alcohol drink (chang) and tobacco smoking [4] have been suggested to predispose an individual to gastric cancer in the North East of India.
- Infections: A link between H. pylori and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and the development of gastric cancer have been suggested. [14],[15],[16],[17]
- Hereditary factors: Patients with hereditary cancer syndromes such as hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC), [18] familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome are at risk for the development of gastric cancer. An autosomal dominant mutation in the gene encoding the cell adhesion molecule, E-cadherin may lead to the development of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer. [19],[20]
- Other factors: Obesity, [21] prior radiation exposure for other malignancies, [22] and the blood group A [23] have been reported to influence the development of gastric cancer in individuals.
| Classification of Gastric Cancer | | |
Lauren divided gastric cancers into two main types, namely, intestinal and diffuse. [24] The World Health Organization (WHO) subsequently provided a classification for gastric cancers. [25] However, from a clinical management stand point, the important classifications of gastric cancer include the differentiation between early and advanced gastric cancer and the appreciation of the extent of spread [locoregional and distant or tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM)]. Although the actual TNM is detected in retrospect following pathological assessment of the resected tumor, preoperative prediction of the TNM staging assumes importance in deciding the best approach for the patient.
Early gastric cancer is defined as a cancer in which the depth of invasion is limited to the submucosal layer of the stomach on histological examination, [26] irrespective of lymph node metastasis. [27],[28] These tumors, classified as Type 0, [29] have been further subdivided into protruding (type 0-I), superficial elevated (type 0-IIA), superficial flat (type 0-IIB), superficial depressed (type 0-IIC), and excavated (type 0-III).
However, advanced gastric cancers have been macroscopically classified as follows, [29] namely,
Type 1: Mass-Polypoidtumors, sharply demarcated from the surrounding mucosa.
Type 2: Ulcerative-Ulcerated tumors with raised margins, surrounded by a thickened gastric wall with clear margins.
Type 3: Infiltrative ulcerative-Ulcerated tumors with raised margins, surrounded by a thickened gastric wall without clear margins.
Type 4: Diffuse infiltrative-Tumors without marked ulceration or raised margins, the gastric wall is thickened and indurated and the margin is unclear.
Type 5: Unclassifiable-Tumors that cannot be classified into any of the above types.
American Joint Committee on Cancer staging - 7th Edition [30]
The most widely used classification of tumors based on locoregional and distant spread is provided by the American Joint Committee on Cancer. This classification describes the tumor (T) and lymph node (N) involvement as well as distant tumor spread (M). The classification system that was recently updated in 2010 has been highlighted in [Table 1].  | Table 1: Seventh edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging of Gastric Cancer[30]
Click here to view |
Signs and Symptoms of Gastric Cancer
Patients with new-onset dyspepsia after the age of 40 years should always be advised an upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy to rule out an underlying malignancy. The features commonly associated with gastric cancer, namely, anemia and associated fatigue, anorexia, and marked weight loss are generally late signs of the disease. Dysphagia or difficulty in swallowing may be encountered in tumors in the proximal stomach, whereas vomiting of ingested food a couple of hours to even days after a meal (gastric outlet obstruction) is generally encountered in tumors involving the antrum and pylorus of the stomach. Malaena due to chronic bleeding from the ulcer is another important symptom that should alert the clinician to advise an upper GI endoscopy.
Clinical signs in a patient with gastric cancer include pallor from bleeding and a succession splash in a distal tumor. Features such ascites, jaundice (unless associated with a coincidental stone in the bile duct or hepatitis), a Blummer shelf/palpable large adnexal masses on digital rectal examination (Krukenberg tumor), an umbilical nodule (Sister Mary Joseph nodule), or a left supraclavicular lymph node generally suggest advanced disease. Very rarely cutaneous deposits have been reported on the entire abdominal wall. [31]
Diagnosis and Staging of Gastric Carcinoma
Following the clinical evaluation, an approach to a patient with suspected gastric cancer should include the following:
- An upper GI endoscopy-this will not only provide a confirmation of the lesion location, but also pathological proof of the cancer (which is essential for planning treatment). Narrow band imaging, an image-enhancement system employing optic digital methods to enhance images of blood vessels on mucosal surfaces, allowing improved visualization of mucosal surface structures has not been found to be vastly useful in the stomach (as compared with the esophagus) owing to the presence of mucus and regurgitated bile, the light volume insufficiency created by the wide cavity, and finally chronic food-associated stimuli and H. pylori-related gastritis. [32]
- Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen and pelvis-this will enable localization of the primary tumor, its extent, and its relationships with the surrounding structures such as the pancreas, liver, diaphragm, transverse colon, and portal structures. It will also provide an objective visual demonstration of the presence or absence of gastric outlet obstruction. Besides, it can also be useful for evaluation of regional lymph nodes and distant metastases. Another important indication for CT scan is in the assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by the RECIST guidelines. [33] Although CT may not be as accurate as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for evaluation of the T-stage (72% vs 83%), it surpasses MRI in terms of nodal staging (66% vs 53%) and in the evaluation of distant metastases [34],[35] and is hence preferred as the initial investigation. Moreover, the availability of the technology as well as the expertise of interpretation of CT scan makes CT the first, and often the only, imaging employed in the preoperative evaluation of gastric cancer.
- Tumor markers-tumor markers, serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9), although not routinely recommended owing to lack of sufficient evidence, may have a role if they are elevated at diagnosis. In these patients, these tumor markers can be used in the follow-up to detect recurrent disease.
- Chest X-ray- helps to rule out lung metastases and co-existent pulmonary pathologies that may deserve attention when planning patient treatment.
- Routine blood investigations (complete blood count, renal and liver function tests)-although these do not aid in the confirmation of the diagnosis of a patient with gastric cancer, they are included here as they need to be performed in patients who are going to be treated by the clinician using a mutlimodality approach.
Based on the above investigations, the clinician will be able to confidently determine if the cancer is early or advanced. If the cancer is early and an endoscopic therapeutic approach is being planned, an endosonography (EUS) forms an important investigative adjunct to rule out lymph node metastases with a reasonable degree of confidence. A recent meta-analysis exploring the role of EUS in the preoperative staging of gastric cancer, [36] comprising 22 articles, found that with regard to nodal staging, the pooled sensitivity was 74%, and specificity was 80%. On the other hand, if the above investigations indicate that the disease is locally advanced (T3 or T4), the clinician may either choose between 18 fluoro-deoxy glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in proximal gastroesophageal well-differentiated tumors to assess metastases, or a staging laparoscopy (SL). [37] In such patients, detection of metastatic disease by SL could help direct the patient toward palliative chemotherapy rather than neoadjuvant therapy. PET should be avoided in patients with non-solid-type poorly differentiated carcinoma or signet ring cell tumors owing to the high false negative rates. [38] PET, however, has the ability to also guide treatment response in FDG-avid tumors. [38]
Her-2 testing has been recommended for patients with metastatic or recurrent advanced gastric cancer. [39] However, it has no role in resectable, non- metastatic disease.
Treatment of Resectable Gastric Cancer
Complete removal of the tumor with microscopically negative margins (R0 resection) offers the best chance of survival in patients with gastric cancer. Removal of the tumor may be achieved by endoscopy or surgery-the choice depending on the extent of the tumor and nodal involvement. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and novel targeted therapies serve as adjunctive tools to surgery in improving survival and/or delaying recurrence of disease, whenever they are indicated.
Early Gastric Cancer
Generally, early gastric cancers are rare in places that do not have an active screening program (as is the case in Japan). However, detecting these lesions in patients who undergo an endoscopy and biopsy for early symptoms is certainly possible.
Caution is advised, at the outset, in interpreting data that may suggest that endoscopy is an option in all early gastric cancers. By definition, early gastric cancer is defined by the extent of gastric wall invasion (into submucosa [26] ) irrespective of lymph node involvement. [27],[28] Although endoscopic excision is certainly feasible in early lesions, they cannot be performed if there is a suspicion of lymph node disease-in which case surgery is the sole option at the present time.
Therapeutic Endoscopy for Early Gastric Cancer
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESMD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) are the two therapeutic endoscopic techniques. Despite the evidence that ESMD has a higher risk of complications, such as perforation and bleeding, the success rate of complete (en bloc) resection is higher [40] with a lower local recurrence rate. [41] Before performing either procedure, it is imperative that an EUS be done to determine the extent of local disease and lymph node involvement (which has been reported to be up to 42% even in early gastric cancer. [42],[43] ).
Factors Predictive of the Lymph Node Metastases
Size of Lesion
Rong et al. [44] recently reviewed the data and noted that in lesions >2 cm, the incidence of lymph node involvement increases to 25.64% as compared with 5.13% in lesions between 1 and 2 cm.
Lymphovascular Invasion (LVI)
The presence of LVI is an independent risk factor for the presence of lymph node metastases. [45],[46],[47]
Depth of Invasion
Tumors invading into the submucosa are at risk of spreading to lymph nodes. [46] The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association [29] has subdivided submucosal (SM) invasion into SM1 (tumor invasion within 0.5 mm of the muscularis mucosae) and SM2 (tumor invasion is 0.5 mm or more into the muscularis mucosae). Park et al. [47] found that the incidence of lymph node metastasis rate in patients with poorly differentiated SM2, or more, lesions rose sharply to 30% from 3.4% (in lesions confined to the mucosa).
Histological Type
Undifferentiated lesions are at a significantly higher risk for lymph node metastases as compared with differentiated lesions. [44],[48]
Other Feature
The available evidence of features such as ulceration and macroscopic type of tumor is conflicting and thus no firm conclusions can be drawn from the data.
Thus, in lesions more than 2 cm, or those that have features, such as LVI, submucosal invasion, and undifferentiation, surgery should be the preferred option in view of the higher risk of lymph node metastasis.
Surgery for Gastric Carcinoma
Treatment of the Primary Tumor
In tumors other than early gastric cancer (<2 cm with no concerning features mentioned above), surgery remains the mainstay of tumor removal.
Extent of Resection
The extent of resection of the tumor depends on tumor location in the stomach. Three surgeries have been defined oncologically for the removal of the primary tumor, namely, subtotal (distal), proximal, and total gastrectomy.
Based on the anatomical division of the stomach as proposed in the "Japanese Classification of Gastric Carcinoma," [29] the prescribed surgeries are as follows:
• Lesions in the Upper Third
The choice of surgery is between a total (with a Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy with or without pouch) and a proximal gastrectomy (where at least half of the stomach can be preserved). In terms of oncological outcomes, Wen et al. [49] recently concluded that there exists no difference between the two procedures.
• Lesions in the Middle Third
Tumors arising from and involving the upper middle third of the stomach are best managed by a total gastrectomy. [50] In some tumors of the middle third, the lesion may be preferentially located in the lower part of the middle third for which a (distal) subtotal gastrectomy can be offered to the patient so long as negative resection margins can be obtained.
• Lesions in the Lower Third
Although total gastrectomy was considered the standard operation in the past, current evidence clearly supports no difference in oncological outcomes for subtotal gastrectomy performed for lesions in this location of the stomach. [51],[52]
Anastomotic Technique
Although staplers have been shown to be associated with an increased risk for anastomotic strictures in reconstruction following esophagectomy, [53] the only study comparing the two techniques following resection for gastric cancer by Takeyoshi et al. [54] found no difference in anastomotic stricture formation with a lower incidence of anastomotic leak in the stapled group.
Intraoperative Frozen Section for Margins
Given that a positive resection margin is associated with poor overall outcomes, [55] especially in patients with less than five lymph nodes involved by disease, [56] performing intraoperative frozen section (IOFS) in routine practice for T3/T4 lesions or those in whom the gross resection margin is less than 5 cm is encouraged. [57] However, this also raises an important issue on the ability to revise the margin. Sun et al. [58] found that the impact of a positive final pathological margin (following a negative frozen section result) was negated by the presence of higher disease stage (including T stage) and nodal involvement. Thus, should a safe revision of the resection margin be achievable, this should be performed and confirmed on IOFS. However, the choice of performing a more extensive resection (eg, a pancreatoduodenectomy to achieve a distal negative margin) needs to be tempered by taking into account the extent of disease and the patient's ability to tolerate an extensive resection [57] (see "Multivisceral resections" section).
Reconstruction after a Total Gastrectomy
Removal of the stomach, with the resultant loss of its reservoir and nutritional functions does alter the patient's life following surgery. Although there exists no strategy to compensate the lack of gastric acid in digestion post-total gastrectomy, Vitamin B12 supplementation may help in overcoming the absence of intrinsic factor production. With regard to the reservoir function, various techniques for reconstruction following total gastrectomy have been attempted, which aim at targeting three important aspects, namely, prevention of reflux, preservation of duodenal transit, and creation of a gastric reservoir. [59] In the past, esophagoduodenostomy was suggested as a form of reconstruction. [60] Currently, the main technique of reconstruction performed the world over is the esophagojejunostomy, which can be performed as a Roux-loop of jejunum anastomosed to the esophagus or a pouch (J-, S- or Ω-shaped) constructed from the jejunum and anastomosed to the esophagus. The evidence in the literature on the types of reconstruction after total gastrectomy has indicated that creation of a small bowel reservoir in the form of a pouch improved early postoperative eating capacity, body weight, and quality of life, as well as helped reduce symptoms of dumping and heartburn. [59],[61]
Lymphadenectomy
[Table 2] provides the anatomical lymph node stations as described by the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. [62] The extent of lymphadenectomy has been described as D0-D2 based on clearance of the lymph node echelons for a particular subsite of the stomach. The use of the terminology D3 and D4 lymphadenectomy has now been ceased owing to the appreciation of the lack of benefit of paraaotic lymphadenectomy as compared with a D2 lymphadenectomy. [63],[64],[65],[66] The 3rd edition of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association has provided the prescribed extent of lymphadenectomy as per the extent of resection, which is summarized in [Table 3]. | Table 2: Regional Lymph Nodes Draining the Stomach from the Japanese Gastric Cancer Associationa[29]
Click here to view |
 | Table 3: Definition of Lymphadenectomy as per the Type of Gastrectomy[62]
Click here to view |
A D2 lymphadenectomy (removal of lymph nodes up to, and including, the second echelon) is currently regarded as the standard of care, the world over, for tumors ≥ T1b. [39] For tumors that are either carcinoma in situ or T1a, a D0/D1 lymphadenectomy would suffice. [39] For an adequate staging of gastric cancer, a minimum of 16 lymph nodes need to be assessed. [67]
Even in patients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy as part of planned perioperative therapy for locally advanced (but nonmetastatic) cancers, the performance of a D2 lymphadenectomy is considered essential. [68]
Bursectomy
The rationale for performing a bursectomy, the dissection of the peritoneal lining of the lesser sac (the lining over the anterior transverse mesocolon and pancreas) along with omentectomy, [69],[70] is to remove potential micrometastases disseminated into the bursa omentalis, which may occur in cancers located in the posterior wall of the stomach. [71] There is no high-level evidence in literature to currently recommend bursectomy more so if the patient is undergoing a D2 lymphadenectomy. [72] A randomized controlled trial is currently underway in Japan (JCOG1001, Bursectomy Phase III trial (Clinical Trials no: UMIN000003688))-the results of which are awaited.
Multivisceral Resections (Including Splenectomy)
The available data on the impact of multivisceral resections on outcomes in gastric cancer is very much heterogeneous. The factors in a multivisceral resection that influence survival include the ability to achieve an R0 margin and extent of lymph node disease. A systematic review of 17 studies published in 2012 [73] indicated that multivisceral resection, although feasible, remains a procedure with a high perioperative morbidity (12%-91%) and even mortality (up to 15%). Thus, based on the available data that a margin-positive resection does not provide a 5-year survival benefit, routine performance of these procedures is not recommended.
Some studies have included the performance of splenectomy under the broad umbrella of "multivisceral resections." The main indications for performing a splenectomy in gastric cancer are (1) as part of total gastrectomy performed for tumors located along the greater curvature of the stomach with metastases to No. 4sb; and (2) in patients with T2-T4 tumors along the greater curvature of the stomach in whom a clearance of No. 10 lymph nodes needs to be performed. [62]
The decision to embark on multivisceral should be tempered taking into account the experience of the surgeon, the performance status of the patient, the disease burden (especially lymph node), the extent of resection and the true and honest likelihood of achieving a complete resection.
Laparoscopic Surgery in Gastric Cancer
Open surgery remains the standard surgical approach at the present time. Laparoscopic gastric surgery is feasible and has been shown to be comparable to open surgery for resection of early gastric lesions. However, the data on the ability to perform a D2 lymphadenectomy is not yet convincing. Two published meta-analyses compared laparoscopy with open surgery for gastric cancer and found that laparoscopy results in a smaller size of the surgical scar and is accompanied by a reduction in minor complications, and faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, there has been no difference in major complications and mortality. However, laparoscopic surgery was found to be significantly longer than the open procedure [74],[75] and is associated with a lower lymph node harvest. [75]
Chemotherapy and Chemoradiotherapy for Resectable Gastric Adenocarcinoma
Following a number of trials comparing the benefit of surgery versus surgery and adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy, [76] guidelines for management have been developed. [77],[78],[79],[80]
[Table 4] provides pertinent information from the landmark randomized controlled trials for chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in resectable gastric cancer. [77],[79],[80],[81],[82],[83],[84]  | Table 4: Some of the landmark trials in chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in resectable gastric cancer (including the most updated follow-up of the trials)
Click here to view |
The GOIRC trial (Italian trial) comparing surgery alone versus surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy failed to demonstrate a benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy over surgery alone. [85] One of the major criticisms of the trial was the lack of surgical standardization. A randomized controlled trial form Japan comparing surgery alone versus surgery followed by adjuvant uracil-tegafur chemotherapy had to be prematurely terminated owing to poor accrual. [86] However, despite this, the study demonstrated a clear survival benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy.
Suggested Treatment Approach
In summary, patients with early gastric cancer (suspected to be T1a with N0 disease), therapeutic endoscopic procedures such as EMR or ESMD remain a valid option so long as the expertise is available and the presence of lymph node involvement can be confidently ruled out. If after therapeutic endoscopy, negative prognostic factors as mentioned above are found, the patient must be offered a surgical resection. If the facilities for therapeutic endoscopy are not available, a D1/D0 gastrectomy must be performed.
In patients with T1b N0 disease, a D1 gastrectomy would suffice as optimal treatment.
However, in patients with T2N0 disease, a D2 gastrectomy would serve as an optimal treatment.
In patients with radiologically predicted disease, that is, ≥T3N0/N+ (node positive) or T2N+, neoadjuvant treatment as part of perioperative chemotherapy would be advisable followed by surgery (D2 gastrectomy). However, if these patients undergo upfront surgery owing to bleeding tumors, gastric outlet obstruction, or refusal for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, then the preferred adjuvant therapy, as per the available evidence, would be chemoradiotherapy for N+ disease or chemotherapy alone for T3/4N0 disease.
| Summary | | |
Gastric cancer remains a disease with a poor prognosis in most parts of the world, including India, owing to a delay in diagnosis. A proper workup using contrast-enhanced CT scans to stage the disease is imperative so as to plan perioperative chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced tumor (including nodal disease). Surgery, in the form of a complete surgical resection, remains the cornerstone of management of resectable gastric adenocarcinoma. There is a high level of evidence to support the role for perioperative chemotherapy as well as adjuvant chemoradiotherapy to improve the overall and recurrence-free survival in these patients.
| References | | |
| 1. | Jemal A, Bray F, Center M, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global Cancer Statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011;61:69-90.  |
| 2. | Dikshit RP, Mathur G, Mhatre S, Yeole BB. Epidemiological review of gastric cancer in India. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2011;32:3-11. [ PUBMED]  |
| 3. | Nandakumar A, Gupta PC, Gangadharan P, Visweswara RN, Parkin DM. Geographic pathology revisited: Development of an atlas of cancer in India. Int J Cancer 2005;116:740-54. |
| 4. | Verma Y, Pradhan PK, Gurung N, Sapkota SD, Giri P, Sundas P, et al. Population-based cancer incidence in Sikkim, India: Report on ethnic variation. Br J Cancer 2012;106:962-5. |
| 5. | Curado MP, Edwards B, Shin HR, Storm H, Ferlay J, Heanue M, et al. Cancer Incidence in Five Continents. Vol. 9. IARC Scientific Publications. 2007. p. 160. |
| 6. | Khuroo MS, Zargar SA, Mahajan R, Banday MA. High incidence of oesophageal and gastric cancer in Kashmir in a population with special personal and dietary habits. Gut 1992;33:11-5. |
| 7. | Kalyani R, Das S, Kumar ML. Pattern of cancer in adolescent and young adults: A ten year study in India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2010;11:655-9. |
| 8. | Dikshit R1, Gupta PC, Ramasundarahettige C, Gajalakshmi V, Aleksandrowicz L, Badwe R, et al. Cancer mortality in India: A nationally representative survey. Lancet 2012;379:1807-16. [ PUBMED] |
| 9. | D'Elia L, Rossi G, Ippolito R, Cappuccio FP, Strazzullo P. Habitual salt intake and risk of gastric cancer: A meta-analysis of prospective studies. Clin Nutr 2012;31:489-98. |
| 10. | Hirohata T, Kono S. Diet/nutrition and stomach cancer in Japan. Int J Cancer 1997;Suppl 10:34-6. |
| 11. | Siddiqui M, Kumar R, Fazili S, Spiegelhaldar B, Preussmann R. Increased exposure to dietary amines and nitrates in a population at high risk of oesophageal and gastric cancer in Kashmir (India). Carcinogenesis 1992;13:2204-13. |
| 12. | Howson CP, Hiyama T, Wynder EL. The decline of Gastric Cancer: Epidemiology of an unplanned Triumph. Epidemiol Rev 1986;8:1-27. [ PUBMED] |
| 13. | Steevens J, Schouten LJ, Goldbohm RA, van den Brandt PA. Alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking and risk of subtypes of oesophageal and gastric cancer: A prospective cohort study. Gut 2010;59:39-48. |
| 14. | Polk DB, RM Peek Jr. Helicobacter Pylori: Gastric cancer and beyond. Nat Rev Cancer 2010;10:403-14. |
| 15. | Shibata D, Weiss LM. Epstein-Barr virus associated with gastric carcinoma. Am J Pathol 1992;140:769-74. |
| 16. | Tokunaga M1, Uemura Y, Tokudome T, Ishidate T, Masuda H, Okazaki E, et al. Epstein-Barr virus related gastric cancer in Japan: A molecular patho-epidemiological study. Acta Pathol Jpn 1993;43:574-81. [ PUBMED] |
| 17. | Ott G, Kirchner T, Muller-Hermelink H. Monoclonal Epstein-Barr virus genomes but lack EBV-related protein expression in different types of gastric cancer. Histopathology 1994;25:323-9. |
| 18. | Aarnio M, Salovaara R, Aaltonen LA, Mecklin JP, Järvinen HJ. Features of gastric cancer in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer syndrome. Int J Cancer 1997;74:551-5. |
| 19. | Guilford PJ, Hopkins JB, Grady WM, Markowitz SD, Willis J, Lynch H, et al. E-Cadherin germline mutations define an inherited cancer syndrome dominated by diffuse gastric cancer. Hum Mutat 1999;14:249-55. |
| 20. | Gayther SA1, Gorringe KL, Ramus SJ, Huntsman D, Roviello F, Grehan N, et al. Identification of germ line E-cadherin mutations in gastric cancer families of European origin. Cancer Res 1998;58:4086-9. [ PUBMED] |
| 21. | Yang P, Zhou Y, Chen B, Wan HW, Jia GQ, Bai HL, et al. Overweight, obesity and gastric cancer risk: Results from a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:2867-73. |
| 22. | Tarbell NJ1, Gelber RD, Weinstein HJ, Mauch P. Sex differences in second cancer after Hodgkin's disease in childhood. Lancet 1993;341:1428-32. [ PUBMED] |
| 23. | Edgren G, Hjalgrim H, Rostgaard K, Norda R, Wikman A, Melbye M, et al. Risk of gastric cancer and peptic ulcers in relation to ABO blood type: A cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 2010;172:1280-5. |
| 24. | Lauren P. The two histological main types of gastric carcinoma. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand 1965;64:31-49. [ PUBMED] |
| 25. | Oota K, Sobin L. Histological typing of gastric and oesophageal tumors, in international histological classification of tumors, WHO, Editor. Geneva: WHO; 1977. |
| 26. | Murakami T. Early cancer of the Stomach. World J Surg1979;3:685-92. [ PUBMED] |
| 27. | Gotoda T. Endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer: The Japanese perspective. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 2006;22:561-9. [ PUBMED] |
| 28. | Kitaoka H, Yoshikawa K, Hirota T, Itabashi M. Surgical treatment of early gastric cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 1984;14:283-93. [ PUBMED] |
| 29. | Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese Classification of Gastric Carcinoma: 3rd English Edition. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14:101-12. |
| 30. | AJCC Cancer Staging Manual 7th Edition. In: Edge S, Byrd D, Compton C, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A ., editors. New York: Springer Verlag; 2009. |
| 31. | Barreto G, Shrikhande S, Shukla P. Gastric cancer presenting with cutaneous metastasis. Indian J Gastroenterol 2007;26:237. |
| 32. | Nonaka K, Nishimura M, Kita H. Role of narrow band imaging in endoscopic submucosal dissection. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2012;4:387-97. |
| 33. | Therasse P1, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:205-16. [ PUBMED] |
| 34. | Leake PA, Cardoso R, Seevaratnam R, Lourenco L, Helyer L, Mahar A, et al. A systematic review of the accuracy and utility of peritoneal cytology in patients with gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 2012;15Suppl 1:S27-37. |
| 35. | Seevaratnam R, Cardoso R, McGregor C, Lourenco L, Mahar A, Sutradhar R, et al. How useful is preoperative imaging for tumor, node and metastasis (TNM) staging of gastric cancer? A meta-analysis. Gastric Cancer 2012;15(Suppl 1):S3-18. |
| 36. | Cardoso R, Coburn N, Seevaratnam R, Sutradhar R, Lourenco LG, Mahar A, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the utility of EUS for preoperative staging for gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 2012; 15 Suppl 1:S19-26. |
| 37. | Bilimoria KY, Talamonti MS, Tomlinson JS, Stewart AK, Winchester DP, Ko CY, et al. Prognostic score predicting survival after resection of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Analysis of 3851 patients. Ann Surg 2008;247:490-500. |
| 38. | Shimada H, Okazumi S, Koyama M, Murakami K. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association Task Force for Research Promotion: clinical utility of 18 F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in gastric cancer. A systematic review of the literature. Gastric Cancer 2011;14:13-21. |
| 39. | Shen L, Shan YS, Hu HM, Price T, Sirohi B, Yeh KH, et al. Management of gastric cancer in Asia: Resource-stratified guidelines. Lancet Oncol 2013;14:e535-47. |
| 40. | Nakamoto S, Sakai Y, Kasanuki J, Kondo F, Ooka Y, Kato K, et al. Indications for the use of endoscopic mucosal resection for early gastric cancer in Japan: A comparative study with endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endoscopy 2009;41:746-50. |
| 41. | Lian J, Chen S, Zhang Y, Qiu F. A meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection and EMR for early gastric cancer. GastrointestEndosc 2012;76:763-70. |
| 42. | Ito H, Inoue H, Ikeda H, Onimaru M, Yoshida A, Hosoya T. Clinicopathological characteristics and treatment strategies in early gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2011;30:117. |
| 43. | Hirasawa T, Gotada T, Miyata S, Kato Y, Shimoda T, Taniguchi H, et al. Incidence of lymph node metastasis and feasibility of endoscopic resection for undifferentiated-type early gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 2009;12:148-52. |
| 44. | Rong C, Qinqsheng H, Jianxin C, Shibo B, Lin C. Lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer. Chin Med J (Engl) 2014;127:560-7. |
| 45. | Liu C, Zhang R, Lu Y, Li H, Lu P, Yao F, et al. Prognostic role of lymphatic vessel invasion in early gastric cancer: A retrospective study of 188 cases. Surg Oncol 2010;19:4-10. |
| 46. | Li H, Lu P, Lu Y, Liu C, Xu H, Wang S, et al. Predictive factors of lymph node metastasis in undifferentiated early gastric cancers and application of endoscopic mucosal resection. SurgOncol 2010;19:221-6. |
| 47. | Park YD, Chung YJ, Chung HY, Yu W, Bae HI, Jeon SW, et al. Factors related to lymph node metastasis and the feasibility of endoscopic mucosal resection for treating poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Endoscopy 2008;40:7-10. |
| 48. | Kim DY, Joo JK, Ryu SY, Kim YJ, Kim SK. Factors related to lymph node metastasis and surgical strategy used to treat early gastric carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 2004;10:737-40. |
| 49. | Wen L, Chen XZ, Wu B, Chen XL, Wang L, Yang K, et al. Total vs. Proximal gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepatogastroenterology 2012;59:633-40. |
| 50. | Maruyama K, Sasako M, Kinoshita T, Sano T, Katai H. Surgical treatment for gastric cancer: The Japanese approach. Semin Oncol 1996;23:360-8. |
| 51. | Bozzetti F, Marubini E, Bonfanti G, Miceli R, Piano C, Gennari L. Subtotal versus total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: five-year survival rates in a multicenter randomized Italian trial. Italian Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group. Ann Surg 1999;230:170-8. |
| 52. | Gouzi JL, Huguier M, Fagniez PL, Launois B, Flamant Y, Lacaine F, et al. Total versus subtotal gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of the gastric antrum. A French prospective controlled study. Ann Surg 1989;209:162-6. |
| 53. | Honda M, Kuriyama A, Noma H, Nunobe S, Furukawa TA. Hand-sewn versus mechanical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2013;257:238-48. |
| 54. | Takeyoshi I, Ohwada S, Ogawa T, Kawashima Y, Ohya T, Kawate S, et al. Esophageal anastomosis following gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Comparison of hand-sewn and stapling technique. Hepatogastroenterology 2000;47:1026-9. |
| 55. | Resection line disease in stomach cancer. British Stomach Cancer Group. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1984;289:601-3. [ PUBMED] |
| 56. | Kim SH, Karpeh MS, Klimstra DS, Leung D, Brennan MF. Effect of microscopic resection line disease on gastric cancer survival. J Gastrointest Surg 1999;3:24-33. |
| 57. | Brar S, Law C, McLeod R, Helyer L, Swallow C, Paszat L, et al. Defining surgical quality in gastric cancer: A RAND/UCLA appropriateness study. J Am CollSurg 2013;217:347-57. |
| 58. | Sun Z, Li DM, Wang ZN, Huang BJ, Xu Y, Li K, et al. Prognostic significance of microscopic positive margins for gastric cancer patients with potentially curative resection. Ann SurgOncol 2009;16:3028-37. |
| 59. | Lehnert T, Buhl K. Techniques of reconstruction after total gastrectomy for cancer. Br J Surg 2004;91:528-39. |
| 60. | Hughes ES, Parsons PJ. Abdominal total gastrectomy with oesophago-duodenostomy. Aust N Z J Surg 1955;24:295-302. [ PUBMED] |
| 61. | Gertler R, Rosenberg R, Feith M, Schuster T, Friess H. Pouch vs. No pouch following total gastrectomy: Meta-analysis and systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:2838-51. |
| 62. | Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2010 (ver. 3). Gastric Cancer 2011;14:113-23. [ PUBMED] |
| 63. | Sasako M, Sano T, Yamamoto S, Kurokawa Y, Nashimoto A, Kurita A, et al. D2 lymphadenectomy alone or with para-aortic nodal dissection for gastric cancer. N Engl J Med 2008;359:453-62. |
| 64. | Yonemura Y, Wu CC, Fukushima N, Honda I, Bandou E, Kawamura T, et al. Operative morbidity and mortality after D2 and D4 extended dissection for advanced gastric cancer: A prospective randomized trial conducted by Asian surgeons. Hepatogastroenterology 2006;53:389-94. |
| 65. | Yonemura Y, Wu CC, Fukushima N, Honda I, Bandou E, Kawamura T, et al. Randomized clinical trial of D2 and extended paraaortic lymphadenectomy in patients with gastric cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2008;13:132-7. |
| 66. | D'Souza MA, Singh K, Shrikhande SV. Surgery for gastric cancer: An evidence-based perspective. J Cancer Res Ther 2009;5:225-31. |
| 67. | Seevaratnam R, Bocicariu A, Cardoso R, Yohanathan L, Dixon M, Law C, et al. How many lymph nodes should be assessed in patients with gastric cancer? A systematic review. Gastric Cancer 2012;15 Suppl 1:S70-88. |
| 68. | Shrikhande SV, Barreto SG, Talole SD, Vinchurkar K, Annaiah S, Suradkar K, et al. D2 Lymphadenectomy is not only safe but necessary in the era of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. World J SurgOncol 2013;11:31. |
| 69. | Groves EW. On the radical operation for cancer of the pylorus. Br Med J 1910;12:366-70. |
| 70. | Oglivie W. Cancer of the stomach. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1939;68:295-305. |
| 71. | Hagiwara A, Sawai K, Sakakura C, Shirasu M, Ohgaki M, Yamasaki J, et al. Complete omentectomy and extensive lymphadenectomy with gastrectomy improves the survival of gastric cancer patients with metastases in the adjacent peritoneum. Hepatogastroenterology 1998;45:1922-9. |
| 72. | Barreto S, Perwaiz A, Singh A, Singh T, Chaudhary A. Bursectomy for Gastric Cancer - What does the evidence indicate? Indian J Cancer 2014. [Accepted for publication] |
| 73. | Brar SS, Seevaratnam R, Cardoso R, Yohanathan L, Law C, Helyer L, et al. Multivisceral resection for gastric cancer: A systematic review. Gastric Cancer 2012;15 Suppl 1:S100-7. |
| 74. | Ding J, Liao GQ, Liu HL, Liu S, Tang J. Meta-analysis of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection for gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol 2012;105:297-303. |
| 75. | Vinuela EF, Gonen M, Brennan MF, Coit DG, Strong VE. Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and high-quality nonrandomized studies. Ann Surg 2012;255:446-56. |
| 76. | Knight G, Earle CC, Cosby R, Coburn N, Youssef Y, Malthaner R, et al; Gastrointestinal Cancer Disease Site Group. Neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy for resectable gastric cancer: A systematic review and practice guideline for North America. Gastric Cancer 2013;16:28-40. |
| 77. | Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, Thompson JN, Van de Velde CJ, Nicolson M, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 2006;355:11-20. |
| 78. | Okines AF, Norman AR, McCloud P, Kang YK, Cunningham D. Meta-analysis of the REAL-2 and ML17032 trials: Evaluating capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy and infused 5-fluorouracil-based combination chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced oesophago-gastric cancer. Ann Oncol 2009;20:1529-34. |
| 79. | Sakuramoto S, Sasako M, Yamaguchi T, Kinoshita T, Fujii M, Nashimoto A, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer with S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1810-20. |
| 80. | Macdonald JS, Smalley SR, Benedetti J, Hundahl SA, Estes NC, Stemmermann GN, et al. Chemoradiotherapy after surgery compared with surgery alone for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. N Engl J Med 2001;345:725-30. |
| 81. | Sasako M, Sakuramoto S, Katai H, Kinoshita T, Furukawa H, Yamaguchi T, et al. Five-year outcomes of a randomized phase III trial comparing adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 versus surgery alone in stage II or III gastric cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:4387-93. |
| 82. | Lee J, Lim do H, Kim S, Park SH, Park JO, Park YS, et al. Phase III trial comparing capecitabine plus cisplatin versus capecitabine plus cisplatin with concurrent capecitabine radiotherapy in completely resected gastric cancer with D2 lymph node dissection: the ARTIST trial. J ClinOncol 2012;30:268-73. |
| 83. | Bang YJ, Kim YW, Yang HK, Chung HC, Park YK, Lee KH, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin for gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy (CLASSIC): A phase 3 open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2012;379:315-21. [ PUBMED] |
| 84. | Smalley SR, Benedetti JK, Haller DG, Hundahl SA, Estes NC, Ajani JA, et al. Updated analysis of SWOG-directed intergroup study 0116: A phase III trial of adjuvant radiochemotherapy versus observation after curative gastric cancer resection. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:2327-33. |
| 85. | Di Costanzo F, Gasperoni S, Manzione L, Bisagni G, Labianca R, Bravi S, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected gastric cancer: A randomized phase III trial conducted by GOIRC. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:388-98. [ PUBMED] |
| 86. | Nakajima T, Kinoshita T, Nashimoto A, Sairenji M, Yamaguchi T, Sakamoto J, et al. Randomized controlled trial of adjuvant uracil-tegafur versus surgery alone for serosa-negative, locally advanced gastric cancer. Br J Surg 2007;94:1468-76. |
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]
|
Search Pubmed for