Mei SW, Liu Z, Wang Z, Pei W, Wei FZ, Chen JN, Wang ZJ, Shen HY, Li J, Zhao FQ, Wang XS, Liu Q. Impact factors of lymph node retrieval on survival in locally advanced rectal cancer with neoadjuvant therapy. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8(24): 6229-6242 [PMID: 33392304 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i24.6229]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Qian Liu, MD, Chief Doctor, Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, No. 17 Panjiayuan Nanli, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100021, China. fcwpumch@163.com
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 Clin Cases. Dec 26, 2020; 8(24): 6229-6242 Published online Dec 26, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i24.6229
Table 1 Patient characteristics
Variable
TLN ≥ 12 (group A, n = 177)
TLN < 12 (group B, n = 54)
P value
Sex (n, %)
0.591
Male
121 (68.4)
39 (72.2)
Female
56 (31.6)
15 (27.8)
Age (yr)
60 (51-65)
59.5 (52.75-66.5)
0.544
ASA score (n, %)
0.488
1
5 (2.8)
2 (3.7)
2
139 (78.6)
39 (72.2)
3
33 (18.6)
13 (24.1)
BMI (kg/m2)
23.8 (21.9-26.4)
23.4 (21.5-25.2)
0.423
cT, n (%)
0.975
2
2 (1.1)
0 (0)
3
137 (77.4)
43 (79.6)
4
38 (21.5)
11 (20.4)
cN, n (%)
0.109
0
44 (24.9)
18 (33.3)
1
91 (51.4)
28 (51.9)
2
42 (23.7)
8 (14.8)
Preoperative CEA (μg/L)
2.99 (1.55-5.57)
3 (1.68-5.57)
0.729
ypT, n (%)
0.140
0
26 (14.7)
14 (25.9)
1
4 (2.3)
1 (1.9)
2
37 (20.9)
11 (20.4)
3
97 (54.8)
24 (44.4)
4
13 (7.3)
4 (7.4)
ypN, n (%)
0.026
0
90 (50.8)
38 (70.4)
1
64 (36.2)
10 (18.5)
2
23 (13)
6 (11.1)
TRG, n (%)
0.312
0
14 (7.9)
4 (7.4)
1
26 (14.7)
7 (13)
2
78 (44.1)
22 (40.7)
3
33 (18.6)
7 (13)
4
26 (14.7)
14 (25.9)
No downstaging, n (%)
98 (55.4)
20 (37)
0.019
Downstaging, n (%)
56 (31.6)
21 (38.9)
0.324
pCR, n (%)
26 (14.7)
14 (25.9)
0.057
Positive lymph nodes, n (%)
0 (0-1)
0 (0-0)
0.003
LNR
0 (0-0.68)
0 (0-0)
0.012
Radiotherapy dose, n (%)
0.557
45-50.4 Gy/28 F
125 (70.6)
39 (72.2)
< 45 Gy/25 F
34 (19.2)
5 (9.3)
25 Gy/5 F
18 (10.2)
10 (18.5)
Preoperative concurrent chemotherapy regimen, n (%)
0.376
Capecitabine+ oxaliplatin
54 (30.5)
17 (31.5)
Capecitabine, oral
108 (61)
37 (68.5)
Fluorouracil union
15 (8.5)
0 (0)
Tumor location, DAV (cm)
5 (3-7)
5 (3-7)
0.605
Interval, w (%)
8 (6.5-11)
10 (8-16)
0.001
Surgical procedure
0.018
Miles (n, %)
74 (41.8)
26 (48.2)
Dixon (n, %)
93 (52.5)
20 (37)
Hartmann (n, %)
10 (5.6)
8 (14.8)
LLND (n, %)
20 (11.3)
1 (1.9)
0.035
Multivisceral resection (n, %)
10 (5.6)
2 (3.7)
0.574
PNI (n, %)
0.819
Yes
42 (23.7)
12 (22.2)
No
135 (76.3)
42 (77.8)
Intravascular tumor embolus (n, %)
0.463
Yes
23 (13)
5 (9.3)
No
154 (87)
49 (90.7)
Degree of differentiation, n (%)
0.367
Low and low-middle grades
18 (10.2)
9 (16.7)
Middle, high-middle, and high grades
132 (74.6)
43 (79.6)
Signet-ring and mucinous adenocarcinoma
4 (2.3)
2 (3.7)
Table 2 Binary regression analysis
P value
OR
95%CI
No downstaging
0.640
0.797
0.309-2.061
Positive lymph nodes
0.152
0.873
0.725-1.051
ypN0 vs ypN2
0.059
8.239
0.92-73.794
ypN1 vs ypN2
0.442
2.228
0.289-17.163
LNR
0.039
66.666
1.239-3587.217
Interval
0.002
1.084
1.029-1.142
LLND
0.086
0.165
0.021-1.287
Table 3 Oncologic outcomes
Variable
TLN ≥ 12 (group A, n = 177)
TLN < 12 (group B, n = 54)
P value
Local recurrence, n (%)
14 (7.9)
7 (13)
0.259
Distant recurrence, n (%)
35 (19.8)
20 (37)
0.009
Death, n (%)
27 (15.3)
9 (16.7)
0.803
Table 4 Results of Kaplan-Meier analysis
Variable
No. of cases
DFS P value
OS P value
Sex (n, %)
0.708
0.655
Male
160 (69.3)
Female
71 (30.7)
Age (yr)
0.86
0.968
< 60
111 (48.1)
≥ 60
120 (51.9)
ASA score (n, %)
0.912
0.951
1
7 (3)
2
178 (77)
3
46 (19.9)
BMI (kg/m2)
0.519
0.512
< 25
149 (64.5)
≥ 25
82 (35.5)
cT, n (%)
0.606
0.476
2
2 (0.9)
3
180 (77.9)
4
49 (21.2)
cN, n (%)
0.003
0.063
0
79 (34.2)
1
112 (48.5)
2
40 (17.3)
ypT, n (%)
< 0.001
< 0.001
0
36 (15.6)
1
6 (2.6)
2
50 (21.6)
3
122 (52.8)
4
17 (7.4)
ypN, n (%)
< 0.001
0.097
0
128 (55.4)
1
74 (32)
2
29 (12.6)
TLN, n (%)
0.006
0.737
< 12
54 (23.4)
≥ 12
177 (76.6)
Positive lymph nodes, n (%)
< 0.001
0.063
< 2
182 (78.8)
≥ 2
49 (21.2)
LNR
< 0.001
0.058
≤ 0.03
> 0.03
Preoperative concurrent chemotherapy regimen, n (%)
0.148
0.561
Capecitabine+ oxaliplatin
58 (25.1)
Capecitabine, oral
140 (60.6)
Oxaliplatin combination
22 (9.5)
Postoperative chemotherapy
0.933
0.869
Yes
153 (66.2)
No
78 (33.8)
Interval, w (%)
0.044
0.567
≤ 8 wk
139 (60.2)
> 8 wk
92 (39.8)
Surgical procedure
0.168
0.662
Miles (n, %)
100 (43.3)
Dixon (n, %)
113 (48.9)
Hartmann (n, %)
18 (7.8)
LLND (n, %)
21 (9.1)
0.868
0.994
Multivisceral resection (n, %)
12 (5.2)
0.025
0.948
Preoperative CEA (μg/L)
0.344
0.663
< 5
166 (71.9)
≥ 5
65 (28.1)
PNI (n, %)
< 0.001
< 0.001
Yes
54 (23.4)
No
177 (76.6)
Intravascular tumor embolus (n, %)
< 0.001
0.004
Yes
28 (12.1)
No
203 (87.9)
Degree of differentiation, n (%)
0.028
0.152
Low and low-middle grades
32 (13.9)
Middle, high-middle, and high grades
193 (83.5)
Signet-ring and mucinous adenocarcinoma
6 (2.6)
Table 5 Results of Cox regression analysis of disease-free survival and overall survival
Disease-free survival
Overall survival
P value
HR
95%CI
P value
HR
95%CI
cN0 vs cN1
0.620
0.794
0.318-1.978
0.801
0.84
0.217-3.249
cN0 vs cN2
0.496
1.281
0.628-2.610
0.296
1.712
0.625-4.693
ypT0 vs ypT4
< 0.001
0.074
0.019-0.288
0.011
0.11
0.02-0.607
ypT1 vs ypT4
0.338
0.46
0.094-2.253
0.494
0.464
0.051-4.202
ypT2 vs ypT4
< 0.001
0.097
0.032-0.301
0.002
0.035
0.004-0.305
ypT3 vs ypT4
0.014
0.418
0.209-0.837
0.011
0.309
0.125-0.761
ypN0 vs ypN1
0.745
0.823
0.254-2.664
0.805
1.245
0.219-7.086
ypN0 vs ypN2
0.706
1.178
0.504-2.756
0.816
1.156
0.341-3.92
TLN (≥ 12 vs < 12
< 0.001
0.302
0.172-0.531
0.606
0.8
0.342-1.871
LNR (≤ 0.03 vs 0.03)
0.840
0.914
0.379-2.20
0.768
1.228
0.314-4.799
Positive lymph nodes (≥ 2 vs < 2)
0.828
1.1
0.466-2.593
0.978
0.982
0.271-3.562
Interval (≤ 8 wk vs > 8 wk)
0.236
1.369
0.814-2.303
0.626
0.836
0.408-1.715
Multivisceral resection
0.119
1.875
0.851-4.13
0.792
0.816
0.181-3.69
PNI
0.051
1.8
0.998-3.248
0.002
3.747
1.634-8.592
Intravascular tumor embolus
0.244
1.479
0.766-2.858
0.584
1.292
0.517-3.23
Degree of differentiation
Low and low-middle grades vs signet-ring and mucinous adenocarcinoma
0.695
0.739
0.163-3.354
0.811
0.76
0.08-7.221
Middle, high-middle, and high grades vs signet-ring and mucinous adenocarcinoma
0.929
0.930
0.19-4.564
0.913
1.141
0.106-12.243
Citation: Mei SW, Liu Z, Wang Z, Pei W, Wei FZ, Chen JN, Wang ZJ, Shen HY, Li J, Zhao FQ, Wang XS, Liu Q. Impact factors of lymph node retrieval on survival in locally advanced rectal cancer with neoadjuvant therapy. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8(24): 6229-6242