Oncotarget

Research Papers:

Tumor volume increases the predictive accuracy of prognosis for gastric cancer: A retrospective cohort study of 3409 patients

Zhen Liu, Peng Gao, Shushang Liu, Gaozan Zheng, Jianjun Yang, Li Sun, Liu Hong, Daiming Fan, Hongwei Zhang and Fan Feng _

PDF  |  HTML  |  Supplementary Files  |  How to cite

Oncotarget. 2017; 8:18968-18978. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.14859

Metrics: PDF 1226 views  |   HTML 1553 views  |   ?  


Abstract

Zhen Liu1,*, Peng Gao2,*, Shushang Liu1,*, Gaozan Zheng1, Jianjun Yang1, Li Sun1, Liu Hong1, Daiming Fan1, Hongwei Zhang1, Fan Feng1

1Division of Digestive Surgery, Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, The Fourth Military Medical University, 710032, Xi’an, Shaanxi Province, China

2Department of Radiation Medicine, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, The Fourth Military Medical University, 710032, Xi’an, Shaanxi Province, China

*These authors have contributed equally to this work

Correspondence to:

Hongwei Zhang, email: [email protected]

Fan Feng, email: [email protected]

Keywords: gastric cancer, tumor volume, prognosis, predictive accuracy

Received: September 26, 2016     Accepted: January 16, 2017     Published: January 27, 2017

ABSTRACT

Tumor diameter or T stage does not reflect the actual tumor burden and is not able to estimate accurate prognosis of gastric cancer. The current study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of tumor volume (V) for gastric cancer. A total of 3409 enrolled gastric cancer patients were randomly divided into training set (n = 1705) and validation set (n = 1704). Tumor volume was calculated by the formula V = Tumor diameter × (T stage)2/2. The survival predictive accuracy and prognostic discriminatory ability between different variables and staging systems were analyzed. Four optimal cutoff points for V were obtained in training set (3.5, 8.6, 25.0, 45.0, all P < 0.001). V stage was significantly associated with tumor location, macroscopic type, differentiation degree, tumor diameter, T stage, N stage, vessel invasion, neural invasion and TNM stage (all P < 0.001). V stage was an independent prognostic factor both in training and validation set. V stage showed better predictive accuracy and prognostic discriminatory ability than tumor diameter and T stage. VNM staging system also have advantages in predictive accuracy and prognostic discriminatory ability than TNM staging system. The VNM multivariable model represent good agreement between the predicted survival and actual survival. In conclusion, tumor volume was significantly associated with clinicopathological features and prognosis of gastric cancer. In comparison with TNM staging system, VNM staging system could improve the predictive accuracy and prognostic discriminatory ability for gastric cancer.


Creative Commons License All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
PII: 14859