Prognostic significance of peritoneal minimal residual disease in gastric cancer detected by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction

39Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: A sensitive method for detecting minimal residual disease in the peritoneal cavity by quantifying carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) mRNA using real-time quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RQ-RT-PCR) was developed. The clinical value of the method for predicting peritoneal recurrence in patients with gastric cancer was evaluated. Method: A total of 195 patients with gastric cancer and 20 with asymptomatic cholecystolithiasis were included in the study. CEA mRNA expression in peritoneal washings (p-CEA mRNA) was measured by RQ-RT-PCR and normalized to glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase mRNA expression. The cut-off level of p-CEA mRNA for gastric cancer was determined by examining p-CEA mRNA levels in patients with asymptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Results: Fifty-five (28.2 per cent) of the 195 patients were p-CEA mRNA positive. The rate of p-CEA mRNA positivity correlated significantly with clinicopathological factors. In 163 patients who underwent curative surgery, overall survival and disease-free survival were significantly poorer in p-CEA mRNA-positive patients than in p-CEA mRNA-negative patients (P < 0.001). Cox regression analysis revealed that only p-CEA mRNA was a significant independent prognostic factor (P = 0.034). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that p-CEA mRNA was a significant independent risk factor for peritoneal recurrence (P = 0.027). Conclusion: These results suggest that p-CEA mRNA is a reliable prognostic factor and predictor of peritoneal recurrence in gastric cancer.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Oyama, K., Terashima, M., Takagane, A., & Maesawa, C. (2004). Prognostic significance of peritoneal minimal residual disease in gastric cancer detected by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. British Journal of Surgery, 91(4), 435–443. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4455

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free