基于SEER数据库食管癌病理特征及预后分析
Pathological Characteristics and Prognosis of Esophageal Cancer Based on SEER Database
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2020.107226, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 387  浏览: 6,684  国家科技经费支持
作者: 张云波, 郑丽萍, 张建光:淄博岜山万杰医院肿瘤科,山东 淄博;李 敬:淄博岜山万杰医院内科,山东 淄博;刘俊启:郑州大学第一附属医院放疗科,河南 郑州;李锦秋:河北北方学院第一附属医院放疗科,河北 张家口;于会明:北京肿瘤医院放疗科,北京;杨彩霞:齐鲁医药学院,山东 淄博
关键词: 食管鳞状细胞癌食管腺癌预后Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus Prognosis
摘要: 目的:探讨食管鳞状细胞癌(SCC, squamous cell carcinoma)和食管腺癌(AC, adenocarcinoma)患者的预后及性别、年龄、人种、婚姻状况、分化程度、分期、肿瘤位置和治疗措施对预后的影响。方法:搜索SEER数据库2010年~2015年病理诊断明确的食管鳞癌和腺癌患者,共计12,872例。统计患者2年、3年、5年总生存率。Kaplan-Meier (K-M)法计算生存率,Log-rank法检验和单因素分析,Cox回归进行多因素分析。结果:两组单因素分析性别、年龄、人种、婚姻、分化程度、分期及治疗方式为预后影响因素。多因素Cox回归模型分析显示,SCC组中性别(HR: 1.241, 95% CI: 1.150~1.338, P < 0.001)、人种(HR: 0.928, 95% CI: 0.861~1.000, P = 0.048)、婚姻(HR: 0.882, 95% CI: 0.820~0.948, P = 0.001)、分化程度(HR: 0.901, 95% CI: 0.873~0.971, P = 0.006)、T分期(HR: 0.912, 95% CI: 0.833~1.000, P = 0.049)、M分期(HR: 0.680, 95% CI: 0.611~0.756, P < 0.001)、临床分期(HR: 0.702, 95% CI: 0.620~0.794, P < 0.001)、手术(HR: 3.158, 95% CI: 2.819~3.537, P < 0.001)、化疗(HR: 2.182, 95% CI: 1.996~2.385, P < 0.001)和放疗(HR: 1.624, 95% CI: 1.481~1.781, P < 0.001)为预后影响因素;AC组中性别(HR: 1.102, 95% CI: 1.020~1.190, P = 0.014)、年龄(HR: 0.870, 95% CI: 0.824~0.918, P < 0.001)、婚姻(HR: 0867, 95% CI: 0.822~0.914, P < 0.001)、分化程度(HR: 0.817, 95% CI: 0.774~0.861, P < 0.001)、T分期(HR: 0.883, 95% CI: 0.826~0.945, P < 0.001)、M分期(HR: 0.605, 95% CI: 0.562~0.652, P < 0.001)、临床分期(HR: 0.677, 95% CI: 0.614~0.746, P < 0.001)、手术(HR: 3.256, 95% CI: 3.046~3.481, P < 0.001)、化疗(HR: 1.903, 95% CI: 1.775~2.040, P < 0.001)和放疗(HR: 0.887, 95% CI: 0.832~0.945, P < 0.001)为预后影响因素。SCC组和AC组2年总生存率分别为32.9%和40.4% (P < 0.001),3年总生存率分别为26.6%和31.7% (P < 0.001),5年总生存率分别为18.9%和23.6% (P < 0.001)。结论:SCC与AC的预后因素存在差异。SCC总生存率明显差于AC。
Abstract: Objective: To explore the prognosis of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma, and the influence of gender, age, race, marital status, degree of differentiation, stage, tumor location and treatment mode. Methods: Searching SEER database from 2010 to 2015, a total of 12872 patients with esophagus squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma were diagnosed pathologically. The 2-year, 3-year and 5-year overall survival rates were calculated. Prognosis factors were evaluated. Kaplan-Meier (K-M) method was used to calculate the survival rate, log rank test and univariate analysis. Cox regression was used for multivariate analysis. Results: Univariate analysis of the two groups showed that gender, age, race, marital status, degree of differentiation, stage and mode of treatment were all prognostic factors. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that gender (HR: 1.241, 95% CI: 1.150 - 1.338, P < 0.001), race (HR: 0.928, 95% CI: 0.861 - 1.000, P = 0.048), marital status (HR: 0.882, 95% CI: 0.820 - 0.948, P = 0.001), degree of differentiation (HR: 0.901, 95% CI: 0.873 - 0.971, P = 0.006), T stage (HR: 0.912, 95% CI: 0.883 - 1.000, P = 0.049), M stage (HR: 0.680, 95% CI: 0.611 - 0.756, P < 0.001), stage (HR: 0.702, 95% CI: 0.620 - 0.794, P < 0.001), operation (HR: 3.158, 95% CI: 2.819 - 3.537, P < 0.001), chemotherapy (HR: 2.182, 95% CI: 1.996 - 2.385, P < 0.001) and radiotherapy (HR: 1.624, 95% CI: 1.481 - 1.781, P < 0.001) in SCC group were the prognostic factors, while the gender (HR: 1.102, 95% CI: 1.020 - 1.190, P = 0.014), age (HR: 0.870, 95% CI: 0.824 - 0.918, P < 0.001), marital status (HR: 0867, 95% CI: 0.822 - 0.914, P < 0.001), degree of differentiation (HR: 0.817, 95% CI: 0.774 - 0.861, P < 0.001), T stage (HR: 0.883, 95% CI: 0.826 - 0.945, P < 0.001), M stage (HR: 0.605, 95% CI: 0.562 - 0.652, P < 0.001), stage (HR: 0.677, 95% CI: 0.614 - 0.746, P < 0.001), operation (HR: 3.256, 95% CI: 3.046 - 3.481, P < 0.001), chemotherapy (HR: 1.903, 95% CI: 1.775 - 2.040, P < 0.001) and radiotherapy (HR: 0.887, 95% CI: 0.832 - 0.945, P < 0.001) were prognostic factors of AC. The 2-year overall survival rates of SCC group and AC group were 32.9% and 40.4%, respectively (P < 0.001). The 3-year overall survival rates of SCC group and AC group were 26.6% and 31.7%, respectively (P < 0.001). The 5-year overall survival rates of SCC group and AC group were 18.9% and 23.6%, respectively (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The prognostic factors of SCC group were different from those of AC group. The prognosis of SCC is worse than that of AC.
文章引用:张云波, 李敬, 刘俊启, 郑丽萍, 李锦秋, 于会明, 张建光, 杨彩霞. 基于SEER数据库食管癌病理特征及预后分析[J]. 临床医学进展, 2020, 10(7): 1500-1510. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2020.107226

1. 引言

食管癌为常见恶性肿瘤之一,发病率和死亡率分别占全部肿瘤的第7位和第6位。每年大约新增572,000例,死亡约509,000例 [1]。食管癌最常见的病理类型是鳞癌(SCC, squamous cell carcinoma)和腺癌(AC, adenocarcinoma)。SCC的主要危险因素为大量饮酒和吸烟,其他风险因素还包括嚼槟榔和食用热的食物。还有可能存在尚未明确的病因 [2]。超重和反流性食管炎是AC的高危因素 [2]。随着经济发展和饮食习惯改变SCC发病率在下降,而AC的发病率在上升。食管癌治疗主要方式为手术、化疗、放疗、靶向治疗。两组病理类型预后也存在差异。NCCN指出与AC相比SCC更容易局限于气管分叉处附近,易于早期淋巴结扩散,预后较差。也有报道AC相关死亡率正在上升,并在欧盟的一些地区已经超过SCC [3]。本文通过SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result Program)数据库对预后因素进行统计分析,比较两种病理类型预后情况。

2. 材料和方法

通过SEER*Stat软件(surveillance, epidemiology, and end result program institute SEER*Stat software) (ssp://seerstat.imsweb.com:2038)搜索数据库中2010年至2015年病理诊断明确的食管癌患者。

2.1. 入选标准

1) 经病理学证实为鳞癌或腺癌;2) 分期明确;3) 确诊年份为2010~2015年。

2.2. 排除标准

1) 病理诊断不明确及除鳞癌和腺癌的其他病理类型;2) 分期不明确;3) T0期患者;4) 资料不完整患者。

2.3. 基线资料

全部12872例患者中,年龄范围18~102岁,中位年龄67岁,四分位数59~75岁(P25%~P75%),间距16岁。SCC共4222例占比32.8%,AC共8650例占比67.2%。基线资料见表1。分期采用AJCC第七版分期标准。其他人种包括美国印第安人/土著和亚洲/太平洋岛民。婚姻组中其他状况包括分居、未婚同居和未知情况。

2.4. 统计学分析

应用IBM SPSS statistics25软件和GraphPad Prism 8软件进行统计分析,分类变量应用卡方检验。K-M绘制生存曲线,log-Rank检验分析各组变量差异。对单因素分析具有意义的变量纳入多因素分析。判断分组变量满足PH假定的条件。采用Cox比例风险模型进行多因素分析。P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。P < 0.01为差异有显著统计学意义。

Table 1. Comparison of clinical characteristics between esophageal SCC and AC

表1. 食管鳞癌与腺癌患者临床特征比较

3. 结果

3.1. 患病趋势和生存分析

从2010到2015年AC的患病趋势不断增加,SCC患病曲线上下波动,但总体趋势为下降。见图1。应用K-M绘制生存曲线。总体2年、3年、5年生存率分别为37.1%,29.4%,21.6%。中位生存时间15个月。SCC组和AC组2年总生存率分别为32.9%和40.4%,3年总生存率分别为26.6%和31.7%,5年总生存率分别为18.9%和23.6%,(P < 0.001)。中位生存时间分别为12个月和17个月。见图2

3.2. 单因素分析

单因素分析显示,性别、年龄、人种、婚姻、分化程度、分期及治疗方式均对预后存在影响。男性、高龄、黑人、分化差、分期晚是SCC预后差的因素。AC组中年龄和人种对预后无明显差异。两组中已婚预后均好于其他婚姻状况。在两组中肿瘤位置对预后无差异。AC组放疗和化疗对预后无影响,而SCC中差异明显。见表2

Figure 1. Trend chart of SCC and AC

图1. SCC和AC患病趋势图

Figure 2. Survival curve of SCC and AC

图2. SCC和AC患者生存曲线

Table 2. Univariate analysis

表2. 单因素分析

3.3. 多因素分析

单因素分析具有统计学意义的变量纳入多因素分析。分类变量均满足PH假定条件。Cox回归分析显示性别、人种、婚姻、分化程度、分期及治疗方式为影响SCC的预后因素。而性别、年龄、婚姻、分化程度、分期及治疗方式为影响AC的预后因素。N分期在两组中均对预后无影响。见表3图3图4

Table 3. Multivariate Cox proportional risk model analysis

表3. 多因素Cox比例风险模型分析

Figure 3. Risk ratio of squamous cell carcinoma variables

图3. 鳞状细胞癌风险比

Figure 4. Risk ratio of adenocarcinoma variables

图4. 腺癌风险比

4. 讨论

食管鳞状细胞癌和腺癌两者在流行病学、病因、病理和临床特征存在明显差异。在全世界范围内SCC更常见,约占食管癌的70% [4]。在一些高危地区SCC比例可达到90% [5]。而在美国则为AC更多见 [6]。在美国AC的比例在不断增加,从70年代到2000年,AC比例增加了几乎一倍 [7]。本研究数据来源于美国SEER数据库,AC比例明显高于SCC,大约为后者的两倍。AC发病趋势不断增加,而SCC则下降,从趋势图也可以明显看出。在过去20年里SCC每年下降约4% [8]。SCC比例下降主要有两个原因,一方面是AC增加,另一方面是吸烟和酗酒比例的下降 [9]。从病因角度,慢性反流性食管炎与AC明显相关。特别是远端食管在慢性酸环境下的暴露是导致这种恶性转化的病理生理学的重要方面 [10]。而AC的发生与幽门螺旋感染呈负相关 [11]。本研究中AC多发生在胸下段,占比92.1%。而SCC组胸下段占33.2%。SCC主要位于气管分叉处,占比为65% [12]。本研究也显示胸中段SCC占比最高。

食管癌发病率明显存在性别差异。男性为主要发病人群。性别比例保持相对稳定,男性发病率通常比女性高3至6倍。然而,有趣的是,美国数据中性别比例要高的多,大约为7至9倍 [13]。不管是SCC和AC,男性发病率均高于女性,SCC男女比例为3:1,AC男女比例为6:1。在不同的地区存在不同差异 [5]。本研究所包括人群中女性占20.87%,SCC男女之为1.74:1,而AC的男女比例为6.58:1。

手术治疗是局限期食管癌的首选方法。对于T1aAC可以采用内镜下治疗,具有良好的耐受性。局部进展期单纯手术往往难以完全切除。有II期临床试验对局部进展期SCC应用多西他赛联合顺铂新辅助化疗明显提高可切除率 [14]。新辅助放化疗可提高总生存率 [15]。Joel Shapiro等报道术前放化疗与单纯手术相比中位生存时间48.6月vs 24.0月(P = 0.003) [15]。术前放化疗可提高总生存率,但也会增加手术后的死亡率 [16]。也有报道放化疗加手术与根治性放化疗疗效相似 [17]。手术提高了局部控制率,未能提高总生存率。治疗相关死亡率手术组与根治性放化疗组相比明显增加(12.8% vs 3.5%, P = 0.03) [18]。晚期食管癌以姑息治疗为主,对于进食困难者可以应用内照射以获得较长时间缓解,相比支架并发症更少 [19]。对于体能状况较好的AC可以选择化疗,而SCC化疗推荐较少。本研究中AC手术和化疗均预后获益。而AC中做放疗患者预后差,可能是因为在AC组中肿瘤多位于胸下段,且做放疗的患者中III期和IV期比例较大,这部分患者总体预后本来就是较差的。

食管癌总体预后较差,尽管治疗技术不断提高,总体5年生存率在10%以下。手术后5年生存率在10%~40% [20]。也有报道总体5年生存率为15%~25% [21]。可能是因为早期多无明显症状,诊断时多为中晚期,使得总体生存率不高。尽管认为组织学是独立预后因素,但文献报道相关预后存在不一致。文献中SCC与AC相比预后较好、类似或更差的情况都有。Lerut T报道257例食管癌生存分析,认为组织学类型之间预后无差异 [22]。也有报道在不同分期中SCC预后均好于AC (P < 0.05) [23]。J. Ruediger Siewert等报道对于切除后的5年存活率AC和SCC分别为42.3%和33.0% (P < 0.01),R0切除术后5年存活率为46.8% vs 37.4% (P < 0.01) [24]。Holscher AH等报道对于I期5年存活率AC和SCC分别为82.5%和59.2% (P < 0.03) [25]。J. Rüdiger Siewert等对1285例食管癌进行统计分析,AC预后明显好于SCC (P < 0.01),Barett’s相关食管癌10年生存率超过40% [12]。近期文献倾向于AC预后好 [12]。从90年代以后AC的生存时间迅速上升,而SCC维持不变 [8]。本研究中可见AC组2年、3年和5年总生存率明显好于SCC,有统计学差异。

本研究采用的美国SEER数据库,AC占比较多,其中的SCC并不能代表高发地区的患病情况,据此对高发地区SCC进行判断生存预后可能存在偏差。食管癌是恶性程度高的一种类型,尽管治疗技术不断提高,但总体5年生存率仍较低。因此应通过早发现、早治疗和选择合适的治疗方式来提高总生存率。

基金项目

国家重点研发计划项目(2018YFE0114100)。

参考文献

NOTES

*第一作者。

#通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Bray, F., Ferlay, J., Soerjomataram, I., et al. (2018) Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 68, 394-424.
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492
[2] Blot, W.J. and Tarone, R.E. (2017) Esophageal Cancer. In: Thun, M.J., Linet, M.S., Cerhan, J.R., Haiman, C.A. and Schottenfeld, D., Eds., Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention, 4th Edition, Oxford University Press, New York, 579-592.
[3] Castro, C., Bosetti, C., Malvezzi, M., et al. (2014) Patterns and Trends in Esophageal Cancer Mortality and Incidence in Europe (1980-2011) and Predictions to 2015. Annals of Oncology, 25, 283-290.
https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdt486
[4] Smyth, E.C., Lagergren, J., Fitzgerald, R.C., et al. (2017) Oesophageal Cancer. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 3, Article No. 17048.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2017.48
[5] Lagergren, J., Smyth, E., Cunningham, D. and Lagergren, P. (2017) Oesophageal Cancer. The Lancet, 390, 2383-2396.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31462-9
[6] Arnold, M., Soerjomataaram, I., Ferlay, J., et al. (2015) Global Incidence of Oesophageal Cancer by Histological Subtype in 2012. Gut, 64, 381-387.
[7] Njei, B., McCarty, T.R. and Birk, J.W. (2016) Trends in Esophageal Cancer Survival in United States Adults from 1973 to 2009: A SEER Database Analysis. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 31, 1141-1146.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.13289
[8] Njei, B., McCarty, T.R. and Birk, J.W. (2016) Trends in Esophageal Cancer Survival in United States Adults from 1973 to 2009: A SEER Database Analysis. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 31, 1141-1146.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.13289
[9] Alsop, B.R. and Sharma, P. (2016) Esophageal Cancer. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America, 45, 399-412.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gtc.2016.04.001
[10] Souza, R.F., Krishnan, K. and Spechler, S.J. (2008) Acid, Bile, and CDX: The ABCs of Making Barrett’s Metaplasia. American Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology, 295, G211-G218.
https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpgi.90250.2008
[11] Islami, F. and Kamangar, F. (2008) Helicobacter pylori and Esophageal Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis. Cancer Prevention Research, 1, 329-338.
https://doi.org/10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-08-0109
[12] Siewert, J.R. and Ott, K. (2007) Are Squamous and Adenocarcinomas of the Esophagus the Same Disease? Seminars in Radiation Oncology, 17, 38-44.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semradonc.2006.09.007
[13] Edgren, G., Adami, H.O., Weiderpass, E. and Nyren, O. (2013) A Global Assessment of the Oesophageal Adenocarcinoma Epidemic. Gut, 62, 1406-1414.
[14] Kitadani, J., Nakamura, M., Ojima, T., Katsuda, M., Hayata, K. and Yamaue, H. (2020) A Phase II Study of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with DCS for Resectable Advanced Esophageal Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 38, 366.
https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2020.38.4_suppl.366
[15] Shapiro, J., van Lanschot, J.J., Hulshof, M.C., et al. (2015) Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy plus Surgery versus Surgery alone for Oesophageal or Junctional Cancer (CROSS): Long-Term Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial. The Lancet Oncology, 16, 1090-1098.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00040-6
[16] van Hagen, P., Hulshof, M.C., van Lanschot, J.J., et al. (2012) Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Foresophageal or Junctional Cancer. The New England Journal of Medicine, 366, 2074-2084.
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1112088
[17] Bedenne, L., Michel, P., Bouché, O., et al. (2007) Chemoradiation Followed by Surgery Compared with Chemoradiation Alone in Squamous Cancer of the Esophagus: FFCD 9102. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25, 1160-1168.
https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.04.7118
[18] Stahl, M., Stuschke, M., Lehmann, N., et al. (2005) Chemoradiation with and without Surgery in Patients with Locally Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23, 2310-2317.
https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.00.034
[19] Homs, M.Y., Steyerberg, E.W., Eijkenboom, W.M., et al. (2004) Single-Dose Brachytherapy versus Metal Stent Placement for the Palliation of Dysphagia from Oesophageal Cancer: Multicentre Randomised Trial. The Lancet, 364, 1497-1504.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17272-3
[20] Huang, F.-L. and Yu, S.-J. (2018) Esophageal Cancer: Risk Factors, Genetic Association, and Treatment. Asian Journal of Surgery, 41, 210-215.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asjsur.2016.10.005
[21] Pennathur, A., Gibson, M.K., Jobe, B.A., et al. (2013) Oesophageal Carcinoma. The Lancet, 381, 400-412.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60643-6
[22] Lerut, T., De Leyn, P., Coosemans, W., et al. (1992) Surgical Strategies in Esophageal Carcinoma with Emphasis on Radical Lymphadenectomy. Annals of Surgery, 216, 583-590.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199211000-00010
[23] Lund, O., Hasenkam, J.M., Aagaard, M.T., et al. (1989) Time-Related Changes in Characteristics of Prognostic Significance in Carcinomas of the Oesophagus and Cardia. British Journal of Surgery, 76, 1301-1307.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800761227
[24] Siewert, J.R., Stein, H.J., Feith, M., et al. (2001) Histologic Tumor Type Is an Independent Prognostic Parameter in Esophageal Cancer: Lessons from More than 1000 Consecutive Resections at a Single Center in the Western World. Annals of Surgery, 234, 360-367.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200109000-00010
[25] Holscher, A.H., Bollschweiler, E., Schneider, P.M., et al. (1995) Prognosis of Early Esophageal Cancer. Comparison between Adeno- and Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Cancer, 76, 178-186.
https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19950715)76:2<178::AID-CNCR2820760204>3.0.CO;2-D