| Objective: to identify the prognosis value of the clinicopathological factors of advanced gastric cancer, so as to promote the understanding and treatment on advanced gastric cancer.Methods: a total of 411 patients with advanced gastric adenocarcinoma resection in our hospital from January 1998 to December 2002 were enrolled in this trial. The data concerning common state of patients, surgical treatment and pathological factors were collected. These patients were followed up by telephone, short message and outpatient clinic. The results were analysed by SPSS10.0 statistic software. The univariate and multivariate analyses were applied to evaluate the prognositic factors. l-year,3-year,5-year survival rates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier curve mothod, univariate analysis was done through Log-rank and multiple factors comparison though Cox regression analysis. All tests were performed at the 0.05 level of significances.Results: 1.411 patients with advanced gastric cancer resection were registered in this study. The ratio of male to female was 5.13:1, the age of patients distributed from 18 to 84 (57.96±11.58)years.the median age was 60 years. The median follow-up time of the patients was 57 months(l-107 month). 48 cases censored and 189 cases died, 174 still alive. 29 cases had metastatic carcinoma before the operations and 207 of the 382 patients without metastic carcinomas before the operations were found to be metastasis or recurrence after operations, the overall survival rate for 1,3,5 years was 79.89%. 56.20%. 50.76% respectively. The 1-year survival rates of patients in pathologic TNM(pTNM) stage I b,II,IIIa,IIIb,IV were 97.25%. 93.02%. 75.53%. 51.02%. 32%;3-year survival rates were 92.66%. 74.42%. 32.98%. 10.2%. 12%;5-year survival rates were 85.67%. 62.51%. 31.04%. 6.12%. 0%(P<0.05).2.The results of univariate analysis indicated that age, tumor site, tumor diameter,histological subtypes, depth of invasion, pTNM stage, total lymphnodes, metastasis lymphnodes, lympgatic vessel involvement, positive margins, metastasis lymphnodes ratio and distant metastasis were found to be significantly associated with the cumulative survival rate.Among the variables selected by the univariate analysis, only five (pTNM stage, histological subtypes, metastasis lymphnodes, metastasis lymphnodes ratio and tumor diameter)were recognized as significant prognostic factors.Conclusion:1. pTNM stage, histological subtype, lymphnodes metastasis, ratio of lymphnodes metastasis and tumor diameter have been recognized as significant prognostic factors, in which pTNM stage is more predictable than the other four factors.2. we founded the equation for risk factors for prognosis originally: [h(t,xi)]=h0(t)exp(0. 917x1+0.868x2+0.538x3+0.767x4+0.695x5)3. There was significant difference between young and aged GC patients with respect to gender, general subtype, histological subtype and lympgatic vessel involvement.4. There was difference on the significant prognostic factors between young and aged GC patients. The factors were pTNM stage, metastasis lymphnodes ratio and metastasis lymphnodes on the young GC patients, and histological subtype, lympgatic vessel involvement and metastasis lymphnodes ratio on the aged GC patients.Objective: to evaluate the correlation between survivin and AIF expression in gastric cancer and clinicopathologic features and evaluate the value of survivin and AIF in diagnosis and prognosis of patients with gastric cancer.Methods: a total of 29 patients with gastric cancer resection in our hospital from December 1999 to June 2002 were enrolled in this trial. The ratio of male to female is2.63: 1. The age of patients distributed from 35 to 73years(54.34±10.58years) and the median age was 56 years. The pathological diagnosis was all gastric carcinoma. The patients were followed up until January 1st 2007(no patients were consered). Median follow up time was 27.2months. furthermore, 10 normal gastric tissues and 10 adjacent nontumorous gastric tissues were chosen out from the 29 patients as contrast. Survivin and AIF expression in these tissues were investigated by immunohistochemistry. Cross table was applied to illuminate the difference of survivin and AIF expression among gastric cancer tissues, normal gastric tissues and adjacent nontumorous gastric tissues and to evaluate the correlation between survivin and AIF expression in gastric cancer and clinicopathologic features. The correlation between survivin and AIF expression was tested by bivariate-correlate analysis. The survival rates was caculated by Kplan-Meier curve method and the statistic difference was inspected by Log-rank method.Results:1 .the positive expression rates of survivin and AIF in gastric cancer were 44.83% (13/29)and 41.38%(12/29) respectively.2.survivin was expressed in 13 of 29 gastric cancer tissues, however it didn't expressed in normal gastric tissues and adjacent nontumorous gastric tissues, the difference was significant.(P=0.016);AIF expressed in 12 of 29 gastric cancertissues ,1 of 10normal gastric tissues and 1 of 10 adjacent nontumorous gastric tissues respectively, the difference was significant.(P=0.043).3.There was no ignificant difference in survivin expression with respect to gender, site of cancer, depth of invasion, TNM classification, histological subtypes and lymph nodes metastasis except for the age. It was higher expressed in the <60 years group(81.8%) than in the ≥60 years group(22.2%); however, There was no ignificant difference in AIF expression with respect to gender, age, site of cancer, depth of invasion, TNM classification, histological subtypes and lymph nodes metastasis.4.there was no correlation between survivin and AIF expression in gastric cancer.5.there was no ignificant difference in the 1,3,5years surviving rate between survivin positive-expression group and nigative-expression group. So did the AIF.Conclusion:1.survivin was well expressed in gastric cancer tissues but not in normal gastric tissues and adjacent nontumorous gastric tissues; AIF was higher expressed in gastric tissues than in normal gastric tissues and adjacent nontumorous gastric tissues.2.only the age was associated with expression of survivin in gastric cancer; none of the clinicopathological characteristics, including age, gender, site of cancer, depth of invasion, TNM classification, histological subtypes and lymph nodes metastasis was associated with expression of AIF in gastric cancer.3. there was no correlation between survivin and AIF expression in gastric cancer.4. there was no ignificant difference in the 1,3,5years surviving rate between survivin positive-expression group and nigative-expression group. So did the AIF. So survivin and AIF couldn't be a prognostic reference.
|
PDF Full Text Request