Non-curative gastrectomy for metastatic gastric cancer: Rationale and long-term outcome in multicenter settings

Abstract

BackgroundMetastatic gastric cancer remains a significant problem as the majority of Western patients are diagnosed with disseminated disease and no routine therapeutic regimen is accepted in such cases. MethodsA cohort of 3141 patients with gastric cancer operated between 1990 and 2005 was evaluated using a multicenter data set held by the Polish Gastric Cancer Study Group to determine potential risks and benefits of non-curative gastrectomy for metastatic disease. Additionally, parameters of Quality of Life (QoL) were evaluated prospectively in 140 patients undergoing gastrectomy using the QLQ-C30 questionnaire. ResultsGastrectomy was carried out in 2258 patients. Distant organ metastases were diagnosed in 951 patients, 415 of which underwent non-curative gastrectomy. The overall mortality rates were significantly higher in patients undergoing non-resectional surgery (10%) than either curative (3%, P < 0.001) or non-curative (4%, P = 0.002) gastrectomy. The overall median survival in patients with metastatic disease was significantly higher for non-curative gastrectomy (10.6 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.3–11.9) than for non-resective operations (4.4 months, 95% CI 4.0 to 4.8, P < 0.001). The hazard ratio of death in patients subject to non-resectional surgery compared to those treated by gastrectomy was 2.923 (95% CI 2.473 to 3.454, P < 0.001). A gradual impairment in QoL parameters was found over 12 months after non-curative resections but changes did not reach statistical significance and individual parameters were similar to gastrectomy without distant metastases. ConclusionNon-curative gastrectomy for metastatic gastric cancer is associated with significantly better survival compared to non-resective surgery and does not impair quality of life.