Gastric cancer is a global health problem.
Although the incidence of this cancer is declining in many
industrialized nations, gastric cancer remains the second most
frequently diagnosed malignancy worldwide. It accounts for 9.9% of
all new cancer diagnoses and is responsible for 12.1% of all
cancer-related deaths. In the United States, it is estimated that
21,900 cases of gastric cancer will be diagnosed in 1999 and 13,500
persons will die of this disease.
Gastric cancer is often advanced and unresectable at diagnosisa
fact that contributes to its high morbidity and mortality. The
stomach is a hollow organ, and the abdominal cavity is large and
compliant to distention. Because of the large potential space,
patients often develop symptoms only when the cancer is far advanced.
Outside of Japan, an industrialized nation where gastric cancer is
common, early detection of gastric cancer is not attempted.
Reports based on large German and Korean databases show that 57% to
63% of gastric cancer patients undergoing resection of the primary
tumor have lymph node metastases.[3,4] In the United States, data
suggest that 85% of patients enrolled in a recently completed
adjuvant trial had lymph node metastases [personal communication, J.
S. Macdonald, MD, November 1998].
Worldwide, large amounts of resources have been expended in the
search for an effective adjuvant therapy to reduce the risk of
postoperative relapse. Numerous phase III clinical trials have been
published over the past few decades. The results of these trials,
however, have often been disappointing or equivocal and are sometimes
conflicting. Adjuvant therapy trials in western countries and Asia
published between 1984 and 1997 were recently reviewed by Shimada and
Ajani. In this article, we review various approaches to adjuvant therapy.
Selection of appropriate patients for adjuvant therapy is extremely
important. In addition to TNM stage, recent advances in the field of
molecular diagnostics will likely affect the selection of gastric
cancer patients for such therapy, as well as identify new prognostic
markers. Current studies correlating clinical outcomes with the
status of genes, such as p53, thymidylate synthase, ERCC1, and many
others, may help direct therapy for individual patients.
Based on TNM staging criteria, the depth of invasion (T), presence of
lymph node metastases, and number of lymph nodes involved (N) predict
the risk of relapse. This was confirmed in a large German multicenter
trial published by Siewert et al in 1998. The study involved 1,654
patients undergoing surgical resection of gastric tumors.
A significant survival advantage was found for the 1,182 patients
(71.5%) who underwent an R0 resection (ie, no residual disease and no
cancer cells at the resection margins). In addition to the depth of
invasion and nodal status, the ratio between involved and removed
lymph nodes proved to be an important independent prognostic factor.
The prognostic importance of R0 resection, depth of invasion, nodal
status, and the ratio between involved nodes and removed nodes was
confirmed in a large Korean study involving 10,783 patients. In
this study, an R0 resection was achieved in 4.8% of patients.
The American College of Surgeons also has published a large analysis
of gastric cancer patients. This study was based on a tumor
registry review of 25 consecutive patients from each participating
institution seen in the years 1982 and 1987. Data on a total of
18,365 patients were analyzed.
Despite the large number of patients, however, the results of this
analysis are not easy to interpret. This was a retrospective study
that involved a large
number of heterogeneous institutions. Symptoms at presentation may
have important prognostic value. Weight loss was the most common
symptom, reported in 61.6% of patients. However, the presence or
absence of weight loss was not correlated with clinical outcome, and
the degree of weight loss was not specified. Similarly, 42% of
patients who underwent surgical resection with clear margins received
adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation therapy. However, patient
characteristics and type of therapy given were not specified. The
5-year survival rates based on pathologic stage after resection were
reported as 50%, 29%, 13%, 3% for stages I, II, III, and IV,
respectively. These survival rates are significantly worse in every
stage category than those reported in the German and Korean studies.
Histologic tumor type may influence patterns of failure. The liver is
a frequent site of failure in intestinal-type tumors, whereas
peritoneal carcinomatosis is more common with the diffuse type.[7-9]
Diffuse histology is on the rise throughout the world.
Advances in molecular diagnostics have opened new avenues for
predicting clinical outcome. One area of active research is the
determination of p53 mutations. In early-stage, T1 tumors, p53
overexpression correlates with depth of invasion and lymph node involvement.
Another area of active research is the correlation of in vivo
response to chemotherapy with genetic phenotype. Fluorouracil, which
is the most commonly used agent for gastric cancer, targets the
enzyme thymidylate synthase. Lenz et al found that low
thymidylate synthase messenger RNA (mRNA) expression was predictive
of response and survival in patients treated with fluorouracil and
cisplatin (Platinol). More recently, however, Fata et al found
high thymidylate synthase mRNA expression to be a predictor of
The excision repair cross-complementing gene (ERCC1) was studied in
33 patients treated with preoperative fluorouracil and cisplatin. In
this study, ERCC1 expression correlated with response to therapy.
Furthermore, when thymidylate synthase and ERCC1 expression were both
low, 11 (85%) of 13 patients responded to therapy; in contrast, when
both thymidylate synthase and ERCC1 expression were high, only 2
(20%) of 10 patients responded.
The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) practice
guidelines for gastric cancer recommend the following tests and
examinations as the minimum preoperative work-up: history, physical
examination, complete blood counts (including platelets), SMA-12,
computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen, chest roentgenogram,
esophagogastroduodenoscopy, and, in female patients, CT or ultrasound
of the pelvis.
Increasingly, laparoscopy also is being recommended prior to a major
resection. The use of laparoscopy may be supported by the fact that
an R0 resection cannot be performed in 30% to 40% of patients
undergoing surgery. In the German study, 29.3% of the patients had M1
disease at laparotomy. In these patients, median survival was less
than 12 months.
At the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 83 patients
were enrolled in preoperative chemotherapy trials, 73% of whom
underwent a curative resection. In the group who could not receive a
curative resection, 55% of patients avoided nontherapeutic laparotomy
because of an extensive preoperative work-up.
A number of controversies exist in the surgical management of gastric
cancer. The most important of these is the extent of lymphadenectomy.
A D1 resection entails a gastrectomy with the removal of all
perigastric nodes and the removal of the greater and lesser omenta.
In addition to these structures, for a D2 dissection the surgeon
removes the omental bursa portion of the transverse mesocolon and the
nodes along the left gastric, celiac , and splenic arteries. For a D3
dissection, in addition to the standard
D2 dissection, lymph nodes in the hepatoduodenal ligament, along the
superior mesenteric vein, posterior to the common hepatic artery, and
on the posterior surface of the pancreatic head are also removed. A
D4 dissection involves the removal of lymph nodes around the
abdominal aorta, in addition to all of the structures mentioned above.
In the East, extensive lymphadenectomy (D2 through D4) is commonly
practiced without excessive complications. Recently, the Japan Clinical
Oncology Group conducted a randomized study of D2 dissection with
or without para-aortic node dissection; these researchers reported no
treatment-related deaths but a 6% rate of major complications. In the
West, the extent of lymph node dissection is more controversial.
Western surgeons usually do not perform D2 dissections due to the
high rate of complications.
The Dutch Gastric Cancer Group randomized 711 patients with all
stages of disease to either a D1 or D2 dissection. Patients who
underwent a D2 resection had a higher rate of complications, more
postoperative deaths, longer hospital stays, and no improvements in
5-year survival. However, assuming that the ratio of involved
lymph nodes to resected nodes predicts outcome, removal of more
negative nodes, which occurs during an extended node dissection,
may improve long-term survival.
Subgroup analyses of the German and Korean databases show that
D2 dissection benefited patients with stage II disease in both
studies and benefited patients with stage IIIA disease in the Korean
study. However, subgroup analyses are fraught with difficulties. The
level of surgical expertise needed to perform an extended node
dissection appears to have an impact on surgical morbidity and mortality.
An analysis by Estes et al shows that operative documentation
needs improvement. These investigators reviewed operative reports
from more than 300 surgeons given a checklist for documentation prior
to participating in a national protocol. Inadequate documentation was
common. The status of the primary tumor, lymph nodes, liver,
peritoneum, and omentum was not stated in 6%, 10%, 17%, 28%, and 28%
of operative reports, respectively. Also, the reports often lacked
sufficient information about the extent of dissection.
At present, D1 dissection should be considered the minimum resection
for patients with potentially curable gastric carcinoma. Estes et al
found that 54.2% patients undergoing curative resection
of gastric cancer had a D0 dissection. This indicates that adequate
resection and staging are not being practiced. D2 resection, a
proper oncologic surgical procedure, should be considered by
experienced surgeons who frequently perform gastric cancer surgery.
1. Parkin D, Pisani P, Ferlay J: Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer
J Clin 49:33-64, 1999.
2. Landis S, Murray T, Bolden S, et al: Cancer statistics, 1999. CA
Cancer J Clin 49:8-31, 1999.
3. Siewert JR, Bottcher K, Stein HJ, et al: Relevant prognostic
factors in gastric cancer: Ten-year results of the German Gastric
Cancer Study. Ann Surg 228:449-461, 1998.
4. Kim JP, Lee JH, Kim SJ, et al: Clinicopathologic characteristics
and prognostic factors in 10783 patients with gastric cancer. Gastric
Cancer 1:125-133, 1998.
5. Shimada K, Ajani JA: Adjuvant therapy for gastric carcinoma in the
past 15 years: Review of western and oriental trials. Cancer, 1999
6. Wanebo HJ, Kennedy BJ, Chmiel J, et al: Cancer of the stomach: A
patient care study by the American College of Surgeons. Ann Surg
7. Esaki Y, Hirayama R, Hirokawa K: A comparison of patterns of
metastasis in gastric cancer by histologic type and age. Cancer
8. Maehara Y, Moriguchi S, Kakeji Y, et al: Pertinent risk factors
and gastric carcinoma with synchronous peritoneal dissemination or
liver metastasis. Surgery 110:820-823, 1991.
9. Jakesz R, Dittrich C, Funovics J, et al: The effect of adjuvant
chemotherapy in gastric carcinoma is dependent on tumor histology:
5-Year results of a prospective randomized trial. Recent Results
Cancer Res 110:44-51, 1988.
10. Aranda M, Naquira N, Karque R, et al: Mutations of the p53
suppressor gene in gastric adenocarcinoma. Rev Med Chil 126:525-532, 1998.
11. Brito MJ, Williams GT, Thompson H, et al: Expression of p53 in
early (T1) gastric carcinoma and precancerous adjacent mucosa. Gut
12. Lenz HJ, Leichman CG, Danenberg KD, et al: Thymidylate synthase
mRNA level in adenocarcinoma of the stomach: A predictor for primary
tumor response and overall survival. J Clin Oncol 14:176-182, 1996.
13. Fata F, Baylor R, Lipton R, et al: Low thymidylate synthase (TS)
is not an independent predictor of outcome in patients with operable
gastric cancer (abstract). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 18:A241, 1999.
14. Metzger R, Leichman CG, Danenberg KD, et al: ERCC1 mRNA levels
complement thymidylate synthase mRNA levels in predicting response
and survival for gastric cancer patients receiving combination
cisplatin and fluorouracil chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 16:309-316, 1998.
15. NCCN practice guidelines for upper gastrointestinal carcinomas.
Oncology 12(11A):179-223, 1998.
16. Lowy AM, Mansfield PF, Leach SD, et al: Response to neoadjuvant
chemotherapy best predicts survival after curative resection of
gastric cancer. Ann Surg 229:303-308, 1999.
17. Sano T, Sasako M: Low operative morbidity and mortality in
extended lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer in Japan: JCOG study 9501
(abstract). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol, 18:A273, 1999.
18. Bonenkamp JJ, Hermans J, Sasako M, et al: Extended lymph-node
dissection for gastric cancer: Dutch Gastric Cancer Group. N Engl J
Med 340:908-914, 1999.
19. Estes NC, MacDonald JS, Touijer K, et al: Inadequate
documentation and resection for gastric cancer in the United States:
A preliminary report. Am Surg 64:680-685, 1998.
20. Longmire WP, Kuzma JW, Dixon WJ: The use of
triethylenethiophosphoramide as an adjuvant to the surgical treatment
of gastric carcinoma. Ann Surg 167:293-312, 1968.
21. Veterans Administration Surgical Oncology Study Group: Use of
thio-TEPA as an adjuvant to the surgical management of carcinoma of
the stomach. Cancer 18:291-297, 1965.
22. Imanaga H, Nakazato H: Results of surgery for gastric cancer and
effect of adjuvant mitomycin C on cancer recurrence. World J Surg
23. Alcobendas F, Milla A, Estape J, et al: Mitomycin C as an
adjuvant in resected gastric cancer. Ann Surg 198:13-17, 1983.
24. Grau JJ, Estape J, Alcobendas F, et al: Positive results of
adjuvant mitomycin-C in resected gastric cancer: A randomised trial
on 134 patients. Eur J Cancer 29A:340-342, 1993.
25. Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group: Controlled trial of adjuvant
chemotherapy following curative resection for gastric cancer. Cancer
26. Higgins GA, Amadeo JH, Smith DE, et al: Efficacy of prolonged
intermittent therapy with combined 5-FU and methyl-CCNU following
resection for gastric carcinoma.: A Veterans Administration Surgical
Oncology Group report. Cancer 52:1105-1112, 1983.
27. Engstrom PF, Lavin PT, Douglass HO Jr et al: Postoperative
adjuvant 5-fluorouracil plus methyl-CCNU therapy for gastric cancer
patients: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study (Est 3275). Cancer
28. Macdonald JS, Fleming TR, Peterson RF, et al: Adjuvant
chemotherapy with 5-FU, Adriamycin, and mitomycin-C (FAM) vs surgery
alone for patients with locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma: A
Southwest Oncology Group study. Ann Surg Oncol 2:488-494, 1995.
29. Lise M, Nitti D, Marchet A, et al: Prognostic factors in
resectable gastric cancer: Results of EORTC study no. 40813 on FAM
adjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2:495-501, 1995.
30. Coombes RC, Schein PS, Chilvers CE, et al: A randomized trial
comparing adjuvant fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and mitomycin with no
treatment in operable gastric cancer: International Collaborative
Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol 8:1362-1369, 1990.
31. Hallissey MT, Dunn JA, Ward LC, et al: The second British Stomach
Cancer Group trial of adjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy in
resectable gastric cancer: Five-year follow-up. Lancet 343:1309-1312, 1994.
32. Krook JE, OConnell MJ, Wieand HS, et al: A prospective,
randomized evaluation of intensive-course 5-fluorouracil plus
doxorubicin as surgical adjuvant chemotherapy for resected gastric
cancer. Cancer 67:2454-2458, 1991.
33. Neri B, de Leonardis V, Romano S, et al: Adjuvant chemotherapy
after gastric resection in node-positive cancer patients: A
multicentre randomised study. Br J Cancer 73:549-552, 1996.
34. Allum WH, Hallissey MT, Kelly KA: Adjuvant chemotherapy in
operable gastric cancer: 5 Year follow-up of First British Stomach
Cancer Group trial. Lancet 1:571-574, 1989.
35. Grau JJ, Estape J, Fuster J, et al: Randomized trial of adjuvant
chemotherapy with mitomycin plus ftorafur vs mitomycin alone in
resected locally advanced gastric cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:1036-1039, 1998.
36. Bleiberg H, Sahmoud T, Di Leo A, et al: Adequate number of
patients are needed to evaluate adjuvant treatment in gastric cancer
(letter). J Clin Oncol 16:3714, 1998.
37. Carrato A, Diaz-Rubio E, Medrano J, et al: Phase III trial of
surgery vs adjuvant chemotherapy with mitomycin C (MMC) and tegafur
plus uracil (UFT), starting within the first week after surgery, for
gastric adenocarcinoma (abstract). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 14:A468, 1995.
38. Italian Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group: Adjuvant treatments
following curative resection for gastric cancer. Br J Surg
39. Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group: The concept of locally
advanced gastric cancer. Effect of treatment on outcome. Cancer
40. Schiessel R, Funovics J, Schick B, et al: Adjuvant
intraperitoneal cisplatin therapy in patients with operated gastric
carcinoma: Results of a randomized trial. Acta Med Austriaca
41. Sautner T, Hofbauer F, Depisch D, et al: Adjuvant intraperitoneal
cisplatin chemotherapy does not improve long-term survival after
surgery for advanced gastric cancer. J Clin Oncol 12:970-974, 1994.
42. Hagiwara A, Takahashi T, Kojima O, et al: Prophylaxis with
carbon-adsorbed mitomycin against peritoneal recurrence of gastric
cancer. Lancet 339:629-631, 1992.
43. Rosen HR, Jatzko G, Repse S, et al: Adjuvant intraperitoneal
chemotherapy with carbon-adsorbed mitomycin in patients with gastric
cancer: Results of a randomized multicenter trial of the Austrian
Working Group for Surgical Oncology. J Clin Oncol 16:2733-2738, 1998.
44. Yu W, Whang I, Suh I, et al: Prospective randomized trial of
early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy as an adjuvant to
resectable gastric cancer. Ann Surg 228:347-354, 1998.
45. Yonemura Y, Fujimura T, Fushida S, et al:
Hyperthermo-chemotherapy combined with cytoreductive surgery for the
treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal dissemination. World J
Surg 15:530-535, 1991.
46. Hamazoe R, Maeta M, Kaibara N: Intra-peritoneal
thermochemotherapy for prevention of peritoneal recurrence of gastric
cancer: Final results of a randomized controlled study. Cancer
47. Ikeguchi M, Kondou A, Oka A, et al: Effects of continuous
hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion on prognosis of gastric cancer with
serosal invasion. Eur J Surg 161:581-586, 1995.
48. Fujimura T, Yonemura Y, Muraoka K, et al: Continuous hyperthermic
peritoneal perfusion for the prevention of peritoneal recurrence of
gastric cancer: Randomized controlled study. World J Surg 18:150-155, 1994.
49. Ajani JA, Mayer RJ, Ota DM, et al: Preoperative and postoperative
combination chemotherapy for potentially resectable gastric
carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:1839-1844, 1993.
50. Ajani JA, Ota DM, Jessup JM, et al: Resectable gastric carcinoma.
An evaluation of preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy. Cancer
51. Leichman L, Silberman H, Leichman CG, et al: Preoperative
systemic chemotherapy followed by adjuvant postoperative
intraperitoneal therapy for gastric cancer: A University of Southern
California pilot program. J Clin Oncol 10:1933-1942, 1992.
52. Kelsen DP: Adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy for gastric cancer.
Semin Oncol 23:379-389, 1996.