Abstract 133P
Background
The aim of this study was to compare the treatment failure patterns after laparoscopic (LG) and open gastrectomy (OG) in locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC).
Methods
A total of 1792 LAGC patients who underwent radical resection between January 2010 and December 2016 were divided into an LG group (n=1557) and OG group (n=235). Propensity score matching was performed to balance the two groups. Dynamic hazard rates of failure were calculated using the hazard function.
Results
A total of 1175 LAGC patients were included after matching (LG group, n=940; OG, n=235). The treatment failure rate of the whole group was 43.23% (508/1175), accounting for 41.38% (389/940) and 50.64% (119/235) in the LG and OG groups, respectively. The static treatment failure pattern showed that only distant recurrence rate of the LG group was significantly lower than that of the OG group (22.02% vs. 28.94%, P=0.025). Landmark analysis showed a lower early treatment failure rate of the LG group in stage Ib-IIIb subgroup (P=0.004). Furthermore, dynamic hazard curve peaked at 9.4 months (Peak rate=0.0186) and then gradually declined. For stage Ⅰb to Ⅲb patients, time of peak failure hazard was 5.2 months earlier in the OG group (OG versus LG: 11.0 versus 16.2 months). Finally, LG was an independent protective factor associated with early treatment failure in stage Ib-IIIb patients (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.43-0.93; P=0.019).
Conclusions
Given the differences in treatment failure patterns between LG and OG, shorter-interval surveillance for the first 2 years should be considered for stage Ib-IIIb patients after OG.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Scientific and Technological Innovation Joint Capital Projects of Fujian Province.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
164P - The impact of sarcopenia on chemotherapy toxicity and survival rate among hepatocellular carcinoma patients who underwent chemotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Presenter: Elizabeth Marcella
Session: e-Poster Display Session
165P - Prognostic factors in sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma: Multicentre analysis of a European population sample
Presenter: João Gramaça
Session: e-Poster Display Session
166P - Differences and similarities in presentation and management patterns in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) across Hong Kong, Singapore and Thailand
Presenter: Pierce Chow
Session: e-Poster Display Session
167P - Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in tertiary level hospitals in Bangladesh
Presenter: Abdullah Al Mamun Khan
Session: e-Poster Display Session
168P - Response assessments in hepatocellular carcinoma: What are the best criteria to utilize? mRECIST or RECIST 1.1? A retrospective meta-analysis of multiple phase III trials
Presenter: Oliver Bohnsack
Session: e-Poster Display Session
169P - IMbrave150: Management of adverse events of special interest (AESIs) for atezolizumab (atezo) and bevacizumab (bev) in unresectable HCC
Presenter: Masatoshi Kudo
Session: e-Poster Display Session
170P - Sintilimab plus anlotinib as first-line therapy in patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC)
Presenter: Xiaofeng Chen
Session: e-Poster Display Session
171P - Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus lenvatinib versus TACE plus sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumour thrombus (PVTT): A prospective randomized study
Presenter: Xiaoyan Ding
Session: e-Poster Display Session
172P - Triple combination therapy of lenvatinib, toripalimab, and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy versus lenvatinib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma
Presenter: Zhi-Cheng Lai
Session: e-Poster Display Session
173P - Regorafenib in patients (pts) with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) in real-world practice in Asia: Interim results from the observational REFINE study
Presenter: Ho Yeong Lim
Session: e-Poster Display Session