Liu ZN, Wang YK, Zhang L, Jia YN, Fei S, Ying XJ, Zhang Y, Li SX, Sun Y, Li ZY, Ji JF. Comparison of tumor regression grading systems for locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2021; 13(12): 2161-2179 [PMID: 35070049 DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v13.i12.2161]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Zi-Yu Li, MD, PhD, Professor, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, No. 52 Fucheng Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100142, China. ziyu_li@hsc.pku.edu.cn
Research Domain of This Article
Oncology
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Cohort Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Dec 15, 2021; 13(12): 2161-2179 Published online Dec 15, 2021. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v13.i12.2161
Table 1 Criteria of five tumor regression grading systems
TRG system
Description
JGCA/JGCA2017-TRG
0
No response
1a
67%-99% residual tumor/tumor bed
1b
34%-66% residual tumor/tumor bed
2/2a
10%-33% residual tumor/tumor bed
/2b
< 10% residual tumor/tumor bed
3
Complete response
Becker-TRG
1a
Complete response
1b
< 10% residual tumor/tumor bed
2
10%-50% residual tumor/tumor bed
3
> 50% residual tumor/tumor bed
AJCC/CAP-TRG
0
No residual tumor
1
Single cells or rare small groups of cancer cells
2
More than single cells or rare small groups of cancer cells with evident tumor regression
3
Extensive residual tumor or no response
Mandard-TRG
1
No residual tumor
2
Rare residual tumor
3
Fibrosis outgrowing residual tumor
4
Residual tumor outgrowing fibrosis
5
No response
Table 2 Clinical and demographic characteristics of the study population
Characteristics
n (%)
No. of patients
413
Age, median (IQR), yr
61 (54-67)
BMI, median (IQR), (kg/m2)
23.04 (20.83-25.10)
Male
304 (73.61)
ASA score
1
102 (24.70)
2
255 (61.74)
3
56 (13.56)
ECOG
0
229 (55.45)
1
168 (40.68)
2
16 (3.87)
Location
Upper
166 (40.19)
Middle
51 (12.35)
Lower
170 (41.16)
Diffuse
26 (6.30)
Diameter (cm)
3.0 (1.5-4.0)
Differentiation
Well
27 (6.54)
Moderate
176 (42.86)
Poor
209 (50.61)
Mucinous or signet cell
85 (20.58)
LVI
132 (31.96)
Cycles of treatment
2 (2-3)
ypT
ypT0
37 (8.96)
ypT1
25 (6.05)
ypT2
55 (13.32)
ypT3
66 (15.98)
ypT4
230 (55.69)
ypN
N0
169 (40.92)
N1
64 (15.50)
N2
70 (16.95)
N3
110 (26.63)
ypStage
pCR
32 (7.75)
I
57 (13.80)
II
116 (28.09)
III
208 (50.36)
Total gastrectomy
180 (43.58)
Regimen
Platin-based
364 (88.14)
Taxol-based
25 (6.05)
Triplet
24 (5.81)
Adjuvant chemotherapy
308 (74.58)
Postoperative complications
Grade 0-1
277 (67.07)
Grade 2
78 (18.89)
Grade 3-4
58 (14.04)
JGCA2017-TRG
Grade 3 (no residual)
36 (8.72)
Grade 2b (< 10%)
39 (9.44)
Grade 2a (10%-33%)
29 (7.02)
Grade 1b (34%-66%)
78 (18.89)
Grade 1a (67%-99%)
205 (49.64)
Grade 0 (no response)
26 (6.30)
JGCA-TRG
Grade 3 (no residual)
36 (8.72)
Grade 2 (< 33%)
68 (16.46)
Grade 1b (34%-66%)
78 (18.89)
Grade 1a (67%-99%)
205 (49.64)
Grade 0 (no response)
26 (6.30)
Becker-TRG
1a (no residual)
36 (8.72)
1b (< 10%)
39 (9.44)
2 (10%-50%)
65 (15.74)
3 (> 50%)
273 (66.10)
AJCC-TRG
0 (complete response)
36 (8.72)
1 (moderate response)
48 (11.62)
2 (minimal response)
89 (21.55)
3 (poor response)
240 (58.11)
Mandard-TRG
1 (complete response)
36 (8.72)
2 (Fibrosis + scattered tumor cells)
48 (11.62)
3 (Fibrosis predominance + tumor cells)
89 (21.55)
4 (Tumor cells preponderance + fibrosis)
214 (51.82)
5 (No response)
26 (6.30)
Table 3 Univariate analyses for overall survival and progression-free survival using a Cox proportional hazards model
Variables
OS
DFS
HR (95%CI)
P value
HR (95%CI)
P value
Age
≤ 65
> 65
1.12 (0.84-1.51)
0.439
1.12 (0.84-1.49)
0.4351
BMI
≤ 23.9
1.39 (1.04-1.87)
0.027
1.31 (0.98-1.74)
0.065
> 23.9
Gender
Male
Female
1.14 (0.84-1.56)
0.393
1.06 (0.78-1.45)
0.690
ASA score
1-2
3
1.00 (0.67-1.49)
0.993
0.97 (0.65-1.43)
0.874
ECOG
0
1-2
1.29 (0.98-1.70)
0.073
1.30 (0.99-1.71)
0.056
Location
Diffuse vs Upper
3.32 (2.07-5.31)
< 0.001
2.97 (1.86-4.73)
< 0.001
Diffuse vs Middle
2.63 (1.51-4.56)
< 0.001
2.28 (1.32-3.94)
0.003
Diffuse vs Lower
3.94 (2.45-6.35)
< 0.001
3.52 (2.19-5.65)
< 0.001
Diffuse
1.00
1.00
Diameter (cm)
≤ 5
> 5
2.79 (2.00-3.88)
< 0.001
2.99 (2.17-4.13)
< 0.001
Differentiation
Well-Moderate
Poor
1.43 (1.08-1.90)
0.012
1.51 (1.15-1.99)
0.003
Histology
Non-mucinous
Mucinous or signet cell
1.86 (1.39-2.53)
< 0.001
1.77 (1.31-2.40)
< 0.001
Lymphovascular invasion
No
Yes
2.75 (2.08-3.64)
< 0.001
2.91 (2.21-3.83)
< 0.001
ypT
ypT0-2
ypT3-4
3.54 (2.35-5.36)
< 0.001
3.66 (2.44-5.49)
< 0.001
ypN
ypN0
ypN+
3.50 (2.50-4.90)
< 0.001
3.59 (2.58-4.98)
< 0.001
Resection type
Subtotal
Total
1.79 (1.35-2.36)
< 0.001
1.74 (1.32-2.28)
< 0.001
Cycle of NACT
≤ 2
> 2
1.18 (0.89-1.56)
0.247
1.18 (0.90-1.55)
0.233
NACT regimen
Platin-based
1.00
1.00
Paclitaxel-based
1.10 (0.62-1.92)
0.752
1.27 (0.75-2.15)
0.373
Triplet drug
1.05 (0.59-1.89)
0.862
1.03 (0.57-1.84)
0.930
Adjuvant chemotherapy
Received
Not received
1.36 (1.00-1.85)
0.050
1.18 (0.87-1.60)
0.286
Complications
Clavien-dindo 0-2
Clavien-dindo 3-4
1.15 (0.78-1.69)
0.491
1.11 (0.76-1.63)
0.585
JGCA2017-TRG
Grade 3 (no residual)
1.00
1.00
Grade 2b (< 10%)
8.97 (2.06-39.02)
0.003
8.75 (2.01-38.09)
0.004
Grade 2a (10%-33%)
13.55 (3.11-58.93)
0.001
14.03 (3.23-61.06)
< 0.001
Grade 1b (34%-66%)
12.83 (3.10-53.18)
< 0.001
14.05 (3.40-58.09)
< 0.001
Grade 1a (67%-99%)
15.15 (3.74-61.42)
< 0.001
15.55 (3.84-62.97)
< 0.001
Grade 0 (no response)
20.24 (4.67-87.68)
< 0.001
21.15 (4.88-91.67)
< 0.001
JGCA-TRG
Grade 3 (no residual)
1.00
1.00
Grade 2 (< 33%)
10.79 (2.59-45.05)
0.001
10.79 (2.58-45.05)
0.001
Grade 1b (34%-66%)
12.83 (3.10-53.18)
< 0.001
14.04 (3.40-58.05)
< 0.001
Grade 1a (67%-99%)
15.15 (3.74-61.42)
< 0.001
15.54 (3.84-62.93)
< 0.001
Grade 0 (no response)
20.24 (4.67-87.66)
< 0.001
21.18 (4.89-91.78)
< 0.001
Becker-TRG
1a (no residual)
1.00
1.00
1b (< 10%)
8.98 (2.06-39.06)
0.003
8.74 (2.01-38.05)
0.004
2 (10%-50%)
12.19 (2.92-50.87)
0.001
12.72 (3.05-53.06)
< 0.001
3 (> 50%)
15.50 (3.84-62.62)
< 0.001
16.15 (4.00-65.22)
< 0.001
AJCC-TRG
0 (complete response)
1.00
1.00
1 (moderate response)
10.46 (2.46-44.48)
0.001
10.31 (2.42-43.90)
0.002
2 (minimal response)
11.21 (2.71-46.34)
0.001
11.67 (2.83-48.22)
0.001
3 (poor response)
16.31 (4.03-65.97)
< 0.001
16.94 (4.19-68.49)
< 0.001
Mandard-TRG
1 (complete response)
1.00
1.00
2 (Fibrosis + scattered tumor cells)
10.46 (2.46-44.48)
0.001
10.33 (2.43-43.95)
0.002
3 (Fibrosis predominance + tumor cells)
11.20 (2.71-46.30)
0.001
11.66 (2.82-48.16)
0.001
4 (Tumor cells preponderance + fibrosis)
15.85 (3.91-64.19)
< 0.001
16.48 (4.07-66.71)
< 0.001
5 (No response)
20.27 (4.68-87.81)
< 0.001
21.22 (4.90-91.96)
< 0.001
Table 4 Multivariate Cox hazards regression model for the predictable risk of overall survival and disease-free survival in different covariate inclusion in whole patients
Whole patients (n = 413)
Covariates
OS
DFS
HR
P value
HR
P value
BMI ≤ 23.9
1.37 (1.01-1.87)
0.045
1.28 (0.95-1.72)
0.109
ECOG > 0
1.19 (0.87-1.61)
0.271
1.18 (0.88-1.60)
0.272
Linitis plastica
1.74 (0.97-3.13)
0.063
1.30 (0.74-2.30)
0.362
Diameter > 5 cm
1.20 (0.77-1.88)
0.426
1.43 (0.93-2.19)
0.102
Poorly differentiated
1.16 (0.85-1.57)
0.345
1.24 (0.92-1.66)
0.160
Mucinous or signet cell
1.45 (1.03-2.05)
0.036
1.32 (0.94-1.84)
0.111
Lymphovascular invasion
1.53 (1.12-2.10)
0.008
1.61 (1.18-2.19)
0.002
ypT3-4
1.45 (0.92-2.28)
0.113
1.52 (0.97-2.37)
0.065
ypN+
1.96 (1.35-2.85)
< 0.001
1.94 (1.34-2.82)
< 0.001
Total gastrectomy
1.30 (0.94-1.79)
0.118
1.23 (0.90-1.69)
0.202
Without AC
1.35 (0.98-1.87)
0.066
Not included
NA
JGCA2017-TRG (Model 1)
Grade 3 (no residual)
1.00
1.00
Grade 2b (< 10%)
4.69 (1.04-21.08)
0.044
4.50 (1.00-20.27)
0.050
Grade 2a (10%-33%)
5.48 (1.19-25.23)
0.029
5.50 (1.20-25.26)
0.028
Grade 1b (34%-66%)
5.32 (1.22-23.30)
0.026
5.73 (1.32-24.88)
0.020
Grade 1a (67%-99%)
6.69 (1.55-28.96)
0.011
6.22 (1.44-26.81)
0.014
Grade 0 (no response)
8.60 (1.87-39.58)
0.006
8.44 (1.84-38.76)
0.006
JGCA-TRG (Model 2)
Grade 3 (no residual)
1.00
Grade 2 (< 33%)
5.00 (1.15-21.78)
0.032
4.90 (1.13-21.30)
0.034
Grade 1b (34%-66%)
5.27 (1.21-23.05)
0.027
5.67 (1.30-24.61)
0.021
Grade 1a (67%-99%)
6.63 (1.53-28.66)
0.011
6.16 (1.43-26.52)
0.015
Grade 0 (no response)
8.48 (1.84-39.00)
0.006
8.31 (1.81-38.15)
0.006
Becker-TRG (Model 3)
1a (no residual)
1.00
1.00
1b (< 10%)
4.74 (1.05-21.30)
0.043
4.57 (1.02-20.57)
0.047
2 (10%-50%)
5.11 (1.16-22.51)
0.031
5.13 (1.17-22.49)
0.030
3 (> 50%)
6.77 (1.57-29.14)
0.010
6.64 (1.55-28.46)
0.011
AJCC-TRG (Model 4)
0 (complete response)
1.00
1.00
1 (moderate response)
5.39 (1.22-23.78)
0.026
5.34 (1.21-23.50)
0.027
2 (minimal response)
5.01 (1.15-21.85)
0.032
5.05 (1.16-21.93)
0.031
3 (poor response)
6.72 (1.56-28.97)
0.011
6.53 (1.52-28.05)
0.012
Mandard-TRG (Model 5)
1 (complete response)
1.00
1.00
2 (Fibrosis + scattered tumor cells)
5.37 (1.22-23.68)
0.026
5.31 (1.21-23.39)
0.027
3 (Fibrosis predominance + tumor cells)
4.95 (1.14-21.60)
0.033
4.98 (1.15-21.62)
0.032
4 (Tumor cells preponderance + fibrosis)
6.44 (1.49-27.87)
0.013
6.26 (1.45-26.93)
0.014
5 (No response)
8.44 (1.83-38.86)
0.006
8.41 (1.83-38.60)
0.006
Table 5 The pairwise comparison of C-indexes between different tumor regression grade based on Cox regression for overall survival
JGCA2017
JGCA
Becker
AJCC/CAP
Mandard
Modified
Overall survival
JGCA2017
1.000
0.308
0.006
0.018
0.053
< 0.001
JGCA
1.000
0.007
0.021
0.063
< 0.001
Becker
1.000
0.397
0.148
0.073
AJCC/CAP
1.000
0.039
0.062
Mandard
1.000
0.005
Modified
1.000
Disease-free survival
JGCA2017
1.000
0.320
0.002
0.021
0.033
< 0.001
JGCA
1.000
0.003
0.025
0.040
< 0.001
Becker
1.000
0.273
0.136
0.046
AJCC/CAP
1.000
0.112
0.024
Mandard
1.000
0.002
Modified
1.000
Citation: Liu ZN, Wang YK, Zhang L, Jia YN, Fei S, Ying XJ, Zhang Y, Li SX, Sun Y, Li ZY, Ji JF. Comparison of tumor regression grading systems for locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2021; 13(12): 2161-2179