Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Gastroenterol. Dec 28, 2021; 27(48): 8357-8369
Published online Dec 28, 2021. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i48.8357
Table 1 Patient characteristics during first-line doublet chemotherapy according to treatment period
Clinical characteristicsTraining set (2012-2015), n = 937
Validation set (2008-2011), n = 946
P value
Sex, male, n (%)583 (62.2)637 (67.3)0.020
Age
Median, range56 (19-91)57 (20-85)0.785
≥ 65 yr, n (%)257 (27.4)259 (27.4)0.981
ECOG PS, n (%)
0/1799 (85.6)817 (86.6)0.531
2/3134 (14.4)126 (13.4)
Prior gastrectomy performed389 (41.5)412 (43.6)0.372
Histology, n (%)
WD/MD212 (22.6)256 (27.1)< 0.001
PD/SRC/undifferentiated691 (73.7)590 (62.4)
Unclassified34 (3.6)100 (10.6)
Status, n (%)
Recurrent318 (33.9)334 (35.3)0.533
Initial metastatic619 (66.1)612 (64.7)
Metastasis No., 2 or more385 (41.5)363 (38.9)0.249
Peritoneal metastasis518 (55.6)524 (55.9)0.902
Liver metastasis160 (17.2)226 (24.1)< 0.001
Lung metastasis45 (4.9)43 (4.6)0.795
PALN metastasis346 (37.3)352 (37.5)0.942
Bone metastasis93 (10.0)70 (7.5)0.051
ALP > 120 IU/L, n (%)201 (21.5)197 (21.2)0.868
Albumin < 3.3 g/dL, n (%)279 (29.8)249 (26.8)0.150
Total bilirubin > 1.2 mg/dL, n (%)62 (6.6)77 (8.3)0.177
NLR ≥ 3, n (%)381 (40.7)375 (40.3)0.881
Table 2 Comparison between the old model and new model developed from the training set
FactorsOld model
Univariate analysis
Multivariate analysis
New model
Score
HR
P value
HR
P value
Score
Poor PS21.983< 0.0012.005< 0.0012
No gastrectomy11.0460.542---
Peritoneal metastasis11.355< 0.0011.355< 0.0011
Bone metastasis21.605< 0.0011.651< 0.0012
Lung metastasis11.2490.188---
High ALP11.435< 0.0011.406< 0.0011
Low albumin11.410< 0.0011.447< 0.0011
High total bilirubin10.9650.806---
High NLR-1.445< 0.0011.461< 0.0011
Poor histology-1.1040.253---
Table 3 Survival outcomes of first-line doublet regimens in the training and validation sets according to the new prognostic model
Risk group
Good risk, 0-1 point(s)
Moderate risk, 2-3 points
Poor risk, ≥ 4 points
P value
Training set (2012-2015)
No. of patients449 (48.8%)319 (34.7%)152 (16.5%)
Hazard ratio (95%CI)Reference1.628 (1.40-1.90)4.013 (3.30-4.88)< 0.001
Median OS, mo (95%CI)15.9 (14.5-17.4)10.6 (9.3-11.9)4.7 (4.0-5.5)< 0.001
Median PFS, mo (95%CI)8.3 (7.4-9.1)5.9 (5.1-6.6)2.4 (1.8-2.9)< 0.001
Survival rate (%)
At 6 mo90.0% (87.2-92.8)74.0% (69.2-78.8)37.5% (29.8-45.2)
At 12 mo63.2% (58.7-67.7)44.0% (38.6-49.4)16.1% (10.3-21.9)
At 18 mo42.9% (38.3-47.5)23.4% (18.8-28.0)6.3% (2.4-10.2)
At 24 mo31.2% (26.9-35.5)16.4% (12.3-20.5)2.8% (0.2-5.4)
Validation set (2008-2011)
No. of patients474 (52.0%)291 (31.9%)147 (16.1%)
Hazard ratio (95%CI)Reference1.634 (1.41-1.90)2.963 (2.45-3.59)< 0.001
Median OS, mo (95%CI)15.8 (14.8-16.9)10.1 (8.7-11.5)5.7 (4.7-6.6)< 0.001
Median PFS, mo (95%CI)7.0 (6.3-7.7)5.6 (5.1-6.1)3.2 (2.5-3.9)< 0.001
Survival rate (%)
At 6 mo88.6% (85.7-91.5)72.2% (67.1-77.3)47.6% (39.6-55.7)
At 12 mo64.3% (60.0-68.6)42.3% (36.6-48.0)17.0% (10.9-23.1)
At 18 mo40.1% (35.7-44.5)22.0% (17.2-26.8)6.1% (2.2-10.0)
At 24 mo25.9% (22.0-29.8)13.1% (9.2-17.0)4.8% (1.3-8.3)
Validation set (2008-2011) according to old model
No. of patients393 (41.7%)390 (41.4%)160 (16.9%)
Hazard ratio (95%CI)Reference1.493 (1.29-1.73)3.281 (2.71-3.98)< 0.001
Median OS, mo (95%CI)16.2 (15.3-17.1)10.7 (9.5-12.0)5.5 (4.5-6.5)< 0.001
Median PFS, mo (95%CI)7.1 (6.3-7.9)5.6 (5.1-6.2)3.3 (2.5-4.0)< 0.001
Survival rate (%)
At 6 mo90.3% (87.4-93.2)75.8% (71.5-80.1)47.5% (39.8-55.2)
At 12 mo68.2% (63.6-72.8)45.5% (40.6-50.4)16.3% (10.6-22.0)
At 18 mo41.3% (36.4-46.2)26.5% (22.1-30.9)5.6% (2.0-9.2)
At 24 mo27.4% (23.0-31.8)17.0% (13.3-20.7)3.1% (0.4-5.8)