Prognostic Significance of Pretreatment Serum Carcinoembryonic Antigen Levels in Gastric Cancer with Pathological Lymph Node-Negative: A Large Sample Single-Center Retrospective Study.

Jun Xiao,Zai-Sheng Ye,Sheng-Hong Wei,Yi Zeng,Zhen-Meng Lin,Yi Wang,Wen-Hao Teng,Lu-Chuan Chen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v23.i48.8562
IF: 5.374
2017-01-01
World Journal of Gastroenterology
Abstract:AIM To assess whether elevated serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is in the inferior prognosis for pathological lymph node-negative (pN(0)) gastric cancer (GC) patients who underwent D-2 gastrectomy. METHODS About 469 pN(0) GC patients, who received D-2 radical gastrectomy were retrospectively analyzed. The X-tile plots cut-off point for CEA were 30.02 ng/mL using minimum P-value from log-rank chi(2) statistics, and pN(0) GC patients were assigned to two groups: those more than 30.02 ng/mL (n = 48; CEA-high group) and those less than 30.02 ng/mL (n = 421; CEA-low group). Clinicopathologic characteristics were compared using Pearson's chi(2) or Fisher's exact tests, and survival curves were so manufactured using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analysis were carried out using the logistic regression method. RESULTS The percentage of vessel carcinoma embolus (31.35% vs 17.1%) and advanced GC (T2-4b) (81.25% vs 65.32%) were higher in CEA-high group than CEA-low group. The CEA-positive patients had a significantly poorer prognosis than the CEA-nagetive patients in terms of overall survival (57.74% vs 90.69%, P < 0.05), and no different was found between subgroup of T category, differentiation, nerve invasion, and vessel carcinoma embolus (all P > 0.05). Multivariate survival analysis showed that CEA (OR = 4.924), and T category (OR = 2.214) were significant prognostic factors for stage pN(0) GC (all P < 0.05). Besides, only T category (OR = 1.962) was an independent hazard factor in the CEA-high group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION Those pretreatment serum CEA levels over 30.02 ng/mL on behalf of worse characteristics and unfavourable tumor behavior, and a poor prognosis for a nearly doubled risk of mortality in GC patients.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?