Impact of lymph node micrometastasis on gastric carcinoma prognosis: A meta-analysis

Table 1 Basic characteristics of the studies included

Ref.	Country	Sex (male/female)	Age (yr)	Median follow-up
Cai et al[18], 2000	Japan	52/272	63 mea	24 M
Fukagawa et al[19], 2001	Japan	51/18 vs 22/163	57.8 ± 10.8 vs 59.8 ± 12.11 med	> 36 M
Choi et al[20], 2002	South Korea	37/23 vs 19/93	59 mea	26.3 vs 25.13
Lee et al[21], 2002	Australia	NM	NM	NM
Yasuda et al[22], 2002	Japan	30/14 vs 13/73	NM	> 60 M
Morgagni et al[23], 2003	Italy	111/119	68 med	60 M
Yonemura et al[24], 2007	Japan	198/110	NM	83 M
Kim et al[25], 2008	South Korea	110/43 vs 21/103	54.7 ± 10.8 vs 52.0 ± 12.51 med	83 M
Ishii et al[26], 2008	Japan	23/12	62 med	57.1 M
Kim et al[27], 2009	South Korea	50/40	55.1 ± 12.2 vs 51.6 ± 12.31 mea	49 vs 47 M3
Wang et al[28], 2012	China	43/22 vs 74/523	31.8 ± 10.9 vs 57.9 ± 13.01 mea	45.6 M
Jeuck et al[29], 2015	Germany	51/13 vs 28/33	66.3 mea	56.4 vs 49.23

¹mean ± SD;

²There are a total of 79 patients in this study and 10 patients were excluded because they suffered metastasis;

³Lymph node micrometastasis (LNMM) negative vs positive. med: Median age; mea: Mean age; NM: Not mentioned.

Table 2 Lymph node micrometastasis characteristics of the included studies

Ref.	Depth of tumor invasion	Method	Antibody	Definition of micrometastasis	LNs (n)	AverageLNs (n)
Cai et al[18], 2000	T1b	IHC	CK (CAM5.2)	pN0 by HE staining	1945	25.0
Fukagawa et al[19], 2001	T2-T3	IHC	CK (AE1/AE3)	pN0 by HE staining	4484	41.9
Choi et al[20], 2002	T1b	IHC	CK (AE1/AE3)	pN0 by HE staining	2272	25.8
Lee et al[21], 2002	T1-T4	IHC	CK (35βH11)	pN0 by HE staining	3625	23.7
Yasuda et al[22], 2002	T2-T3	IHC	CK (CAM5.2)	pN0 by HE staining	2039	31.9
Morgagni et al[23], 2003	T1	IHC	CK(MNF 116)	pN0 by HE staining	5400	18.0
Yonemura et al[24], 2007	T1-T4	IHC	CK (AE1/AE3)	≤ 0.2 mm	12012	39.0
Kim et al[25], 2008	T1-T3	IHC	CK (AE1/AE3)	pN0 by HE staining	4990	27.1
Ishii et al[26], 2008	T1b-T2	IHC	CK (O.N.352)	pN0 by HE staining	1028	29.4
Kim et al[27], 2009	T1	IHC	CK (AE1/AE3)	≤ 2 mm	3526	39.2
Wang et al[28], 2011	T1-T3	IHC	CK (AE1/AE3)	> 0.2 mm and ≤ 2 mm	4202	22.0
Jeuck et al[29], 2015	T1-T4	IHC	CK (KL1)	pN0 by HE staining	2018	21.2

IHC: Inmmunohistochemistry; CK: Cytokeratin; pN₀: Node-negative; HE: Hematoxyline-eosin; T1: Tumor invades lamina propria, muscularis mucosae or submucosa; T1a: Tumor invades lamina propria or muscularis mucosae; T1b: Tumor invades submucosa; T2: Tumor invades muscularis propria; T3: Tumor penetrates subserosal connective tissue without invasion of visceral peritoneum or adjacent structures; T4a: Tumor invades serosa (visceral peritoneum); T4b: Tumor invades adjacent structures.

Table 3 Lymph node micrometastasis positive vs negative groups

Ref.	Sample(positive vs negative)	Patients who died in 5 yr(positive vs negative)	P value
Cai et al[18], 2000	69 (17 vs 52)	3/17 vs 0/52	< 0.01
Fukagawa et al[19], 2001	107 (38 vs 69)	2/38 vs 8/69	0.860
Choi et al[20], 2002	88 (28 vs 60)	2/28 vs 3/60	0.683
Lee et al[21], 2002	153 (75 vs 78)	Total: 38/75 vs 19/78; EGC: 2/12 vs 0/34; AGC: 36/63 vs 19/44	< 0.05
Yasuda et al[22], 2002	64 (20 vs 44)	7/20 vs 2/44	< 0.1
Morgagni et al[23], 2003	300 (30 vs 270)	2/30 vs 30/270	0.779
Yonemura et al[24], 2007	308 (37 vs 271)	5/37 vs 16/271	0.014
Kim et al[25], 2008	184 (31 vs 153)	13/31 vs 13/1531	< 0.001
Ishii et al[26], 2008	35 (4 vs 31)	-	-
Kim et al[27], 2009	90 (9 vs 81)	0/9 vs 0/812	-
Wang et al[28], 2011	191 (54 vs 137)	39/54 vs 18/137	< 0.001
Jeuck et al[29], 2014	95 (16 vs 79)	6/16 vs 21/79	0.026

¹Median survival 17 mo, 95%CI: 7-28 for micrometastasis positive, and median survival not reached, 95%CI: 6-121 mo for micrometastasis negative;

²Disease-specific survival. EGC: Early gastric cancer; AGC: Advanced gastric cancer.

Table 4 Recurrence rates for lymph node micrometastasis positive vs negative groups

First author, year	Recurrence (positive vs negative)
Cai et al[18], 2000	3/17 vs 0/52
Fukagawa et al[19], 2001	2/38 vs 4/65
Choi et al[20], 2002	2/28 vs 3/60
Morgagni et al[23], 2002	2/30 vs 0/270
Yonemura et al[24], 2007	5/37 vs 1/271
Kim et al[25], 2008	12/31 vs 5/153
Ishii et al[26], 2008	0/4 vs 0/31
Kim et al[27], 2008	0/9 vs 0/211

¹Disease-specific survival.