Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display

182P - Cytoreductive surgery and chemotherapy in metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma: A population-based study

Date

02 Dec 2023

Session

Poster Display

Presenters

Dana Al Zamer

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2023) 34 (suppl_4): S1520-S1555. 10.1016/annonc/annonc1379

Authors

D.S. Al Zamer1, L. Theeb2, Y.S. Al-Zamer1, A.M. Hammad3, B. Rawashdeh4

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medicine, JUST - Jordan University of Science and Technology, 22110 - Irbid/JO
  • 2 Medicine, IAU - The University of Jordan, 11942 - Amman/JO
  • 3 Internal Medicine, JUST - Jordan University of Science and Technology, 22110 - Irbid/JO
  • 4 General Surgery, Froedtert Hospital & Medical College of Wisconsin, 53226 - Milwaukee/US

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 182P

Background

Gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) with peritoneal carcinomatosis is associated with poor prognosis with median overall survival surfacing under the one-year mark. The treatment of gastric cancer remains controversial. Using hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in combination with cytoreductive surgery may help reduce mortality rates. This study attempted to investigate treatment modalities available for metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma.

Methods

We extracted all adult patients with intestinal-type gastric adenocarcinoma with 7th edition AJCC M1 stage (2010-2015) using the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Patients with extra-peritoneal metastasis were excluded. We stratified patients into four different groups: surgery, chemotherapy, surgery and chemotherapy, and no surgery/no chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard regression models were utilized to access overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS).

Results

A total of 243 patients were identified. The median (OS) of the entire cohort was 11 months. Patients who received both chemotherapy and surgery, chemotherapy alone, and surgery alone had higher median (OS) compared to no treatment [19, 13, and 6 months, respectively, vs 3 months, p<0.001], as well as a higher (CSS) (p<0.0001). Patients who received no therapy had a statistically significant risk of overall mortality compared to the chemotherapy and surgery group [HR= 9.28 (5.40 -15.94). p<0.001], and compared to other treatment groups (p<0.001). N3B Stage was a significant risk factor for (OS) and (CSS) [HR= 2.69 (1.23 -5.78), p<0.013]. Table: 182P

Median overall survival

N Events Median survival 95% CI
Overall Survival (OS)
No treatment administered 56 54 3 (2- 5)
Chemotherapy alone 91 86 13 (11- 17)
Surgery alone 32 29 6 (3- 16)
Both chemotherapy and surgery 64 55 19 (16- 29)
Cancer-Specific Survival (CSS)
No treatment administered 56 53 3 (2- 5)
Chemotherapy alone 87 75 13 (11-18)
Surgery alone 30 21 15 (4-43)
Both chemotherapy and surgery 62 49 19 (16-31)

Conclusions

The combined usage of surgery and chemotherapy significantly improved the median overall and cancer-specific survival for (GA) patients.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.