可切除胃癌患者神经侵犯的危险因素及预后分析
Risk Factors and Prognosis of Preineural In-vasion in Patients with Resectable Gastric Cancer
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2023.1392056, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 193  浏览: 332 
作者: 宋家伟, 刘志昱, 陈西昊:西安医学院研究生处,陕西 西安;西京医院消化外科,陕西 西安;李纪鹏*:西京医院消化外科,陕西 西安
关键词: 胃癌神经侵犯危险因素预后Gastric Cancer Preineural Invasion Risk Factors Prognosis
摘要: 分析胃癌患者的临床病理特征,探讨发生神经侵犯(PNI)的相关危险因素及对患者预后的影响。回顾性分析接受手术切除的688例I~III期胃癌患者资料,根据是否发生神经侵犯分为PNI阳性组(556例)与PNI阴性组(132例)。Logistic单因素和多因素分析患者临床病理特征与PNI的关系。利用生存分析研究胃癌患者神经侵犯与生存率之间的关系。结果单因素分析结果显示,CA199、肿瘤大小、浸润深度、淋巴结转移、TNM分期、是发生神经侵犯的危险因素(P < 0.05)。多因素分析结果显示,肿瘤浸润程度深是发生神经侵犯的独立风险因素。神经侵犯阳性的患者5年生存率明显低于神经侵犯阴性的患者,两者的差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05),且浸润程度越深越容易发生神经侵犯。我们建议神经侵犯阳性的胃癌患者,可以采取更积极的治疗手段。建议进一步研究以探讨神经侵犯的发生机制和更好的治疗方案。
Abstract: To analyze the clinicopathological characteristics of gastric cancer patients, and to explore the risk factors related to preineural invasion (PNI) and its impact on their prognosis. A retrospective anal-ysis was performed for the data of 688 patients with stage I~III gastric cancer who underwent sur-gical resection, and divided into PNI-positive group (556 cases) and PNI-negative group (132 cases) according to whether neuroaggression occurred. Logistic univariate and multivariate analysis of the relationship between clinicopathological features and LVI in patients. Survival analysis was used to study the relationship between neuroaggression and survival in gastric cancer patients. Results univariate analysis showed that CA199, tumor size, depth of invasion, lymph node metastasis, TNM stage, and risk factors for neuroaggression (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that deep tumor invasion was an independent risk factor for neuroaggression. The 5-year survival rate of gastric cancer patients with PNI-positive was significantly lower than that of patients with PNI-negative, the difference between them was statistically significant (P < 0.05), and patients with deeper invasion of gastric cancer were more likely to develop preineural invasion. We advised that patients with gastric cancer who may have preineural invasion should be treated more aggressively. Further re-search is recommended to explore the mechanisms of neuroaggression and better treatment op-tions.
文章引用:宋家伟, 刘志昱, 陈西昊, 李纪鹏. 可切除胃癌患者神经侵犯的危险因素及预后分析[J]. 临床医学进展, 2023, 13(9): 14709-14714. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2023.1392056

1. 引言

目前胃癌在全球癌症发病率及病死率均排名前5,我国是高发病率和高死亡率的国家 [1] 。目前胃癌的治疗方式主要是根治性手术 [2] 。然而,来院患者大多处于中晚期,往往伴随着神经侵犯(preineural invasion, PNI)和淋巴结转移,导致癌症发生侵袭和转移。人们普遍认为血管生成有助于癌症的侵袭和转移,并且肿瘤微环境中高浓度的血管内皮因子也表明癌症侵袭性的增强。然而随着研究的深入,发现神经侵犯在癌症的发展、转移和复发中同样起着重要的作用 [3] [4] [5] 。与新血管和淋巴管生成类似,新神经生成也参与了癌症的进展。神经已被证明可以渗透到肿瘤微环境中,并积极刺激癌细胞的生长和扩散,而癌细胞分泌的神经营养生长因子驱动了实体瘤中神经的生长 [6] [7] 。Zhou等人发现受累神经的最大直径等于或大于65 μm是5年内复发和胃癌相关死亡的独立危险因素,也是癌症的一个有价值的预后因素 [8] 。迷走神经切断术证实了迷走神经纤维在癌症中的意义。几项证据表明迷走神经切断术可减少胃粘膜厚度和细胞增殖 [9] 。在结直肠癌中已证实神经侵犯可作为评价患者预后的独立危险因素 [10] [11] 。由于是否发生神经侵犯与胃癌患者的生存率一直存在争议,本研究结合文献报道,回顾性分析了在西京医院治疗的688例胃癌标本,并基于病理特征和神经侵犯情况分析了PNI形成的相关临床病理因素,分析其与患者5年生存率之间的关系,旨在为胃癌患者提供更好的治疗方案。

2. 资料与方法

2.1. 一般资料

收集2016年1月~2018年12月在西京医院进行胃癌手术切除且临床病理资料完整的患者病例资料688例,其中男性499例,女性189例;分为I、II、III期。纳入标准:1) 行胃癌根治手术;2) 术后病理诊断明确,病理资料完整且行免疫组织化学分析;3) 术前未进行新辅助化疗。排除标准:1) 胃癌复发的患者;2) 术前辅助检查提示已经发生远处转移者;3) 合并其他恶性疾病;4) 病理资料缺失的患者;5) 随访资料不完整者。研究获伦理委员会批准。

2.2. 观察指标及评价标准

胃癌患者需进行术后随访,截至2022年12月。随访频率第1年每3个月1次,1年之后为每6个月1次。主要采用门诊复查方式进行随访,如果必要可以通过电话等方式随访。随访期为4~69个月。本研究的终点是总生存时间(overall survival, OS)。患者手术病理组织进行苏木精–伊红(HE)染色后由病理科专家进行相关病理诊断。神经侵犯数据均来自患者病理报告。PNI被定义为神经鞘任何层内的肿瘤细胞或神经周围空间中至少三分之一的肿瘤。统计患者临床病理特征,分析影响胃癌患者神经侵犯的危险因素。并利用生存分析研究神经侵犯与患者5年生存率的关系。

2.3. 统计学方法

本研究的数据采用SPSS 25.0软件进行分析和整理。对于胃癌患者的PNI和临床病理资料,进行了单因素分析,并采用χ2检验进行计数资料的比较。差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。我们使用Kaplan Meier法进行生存分析,并使用Log rank检验比较生存率差异,绘制了相应的生存曲线。

3. 结果

3.1. 病理学特征

本研究中对688例胃癌患者的病理学检查分析显示:PNI阳性的患者556例(80.8%),阴性132例(19.2%)。单因素分析结果显示:CA199、肿瘤大小、肿瘤浸润深度、淋巴结转移、TNM分期、是发生神经侵犯的危险因素(P < 0.05),而与性别、CEA水平无明显相关关系(见表1)。多因素分析结果显示,肿瘤浸润深度是神经侵犯的独立危险因素(见表2)。

Table 1. Univariate analysis of risk factors for preineural invasion in gastric cancer patients

表1. 胃癌患者神经侵犯危险因素的单因素分析结果

Table 2. Multivariate analysis results of risk factors for preineural invasion in gastric cancer patients

表2. 胃癌患者神经侵犯危险因素的多因素分析结果

3.2. 神经侵犯对胃癌患者5年生存率的影响

Kaplan-Meier生存分析结果显示,胃癌患者中神经侵犯组5年生存率明显低于无神经侵犯组,两者差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05),见图1

Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier survival curves for stage I gastric cancer patients with and without preineural invasion

图1. 有无神经侵犯的I期胃癌患者Kaplan-Meier生存曲线

4. 讨论

近年来,随着对神经侵犯研究的不断深入,发现神经侵犯不仅影响胃癌 [12] ,也是结直肠癌 [13] 、宫颈癌 [14] [15] 、黑色素瘤 [16] 、阴茎癌 [17] [18] 等预后不良的危险因素。神经末梢分泌因子吸引癌症细胞的侵袭,并促进癌症的进展。另一方面,癌症细胞释放神经源性分子,这些分子加速神经发生以及渗入肿瘤的神经末梢的生长和分支。两者相互作用在肿瘤的发展中起到重要作用 [19] 。PNI经常在胃癌患者的手术切除标本中检测到,并且与患者的生存息息相关 [20] [21] [22] [23] 。因此研究神经侵犯对胃癌患者的预后及其危险因素具有重要的临床意义。

本研究共收集688例胃癌病例信息,其中发生神经侵犯的患者556例,阳性率80.8%,这也可能由于单中心研究造成的偏移,但研究结果与Aurello, P、Tanaka, A等 [24] [25] [26] 一致,神经侵犯与患者总生存率相关。神经侵犯阳性患者的五年生存率明显低于神经侵犯阴性患者的五年生存率。并且认为神经侵犯应纳入术后分期系统,以计划术后随访,对PNI阳性患者提出更积极的术后治疗方案。本研究结果表明,随着肿瘤体积、浸润深度、CA199、淋巴结转移数目和病理学分期的增加,胃癌PNI的发生率也增加。这提示神经侵犯是胃癌预后不佳的高危因素。经过多因素分析,肿瘤浸润深度是影响胃癌PNI独立危险因素。此外,神经侵犯与胃癌的浸润程度呈正相关,胃癌浸润程度越深,神经侵犯发生率也越高。原因可能是胃癌浸润深度越深,与腹腔神经丛接触的几率高。TNM分期也是影响神经侵犯的重要因素。与Yang, K等的研究一致,并且PNI的发生率随着肿瘤分期的升高而增加 [27] [28] 。本研究发现,I、II、III期的患者发生神经侵犯的比例分别为57.9%、80.6%、95.1%。其中,与II、III期相比,I期患者神经侵犯的发生率较低,可能是由于I期患者肿瘤浸润深度较浅的原因。此外,在晚期胃癌中,发生PNI的机率明显增高,这证明TIM分期是胃癌PNI发生的重要影响因素。也有研究在手术切除的胃癌患者中发现,肿瘤大小和淋巴结转移是影响PNI的独立因素 [21] 。

综上所述,PNI与胃癌侵袭转移密切相关,PNI阳性与肿瘤浸润深度、转移淋巴结数目、TNM的分期和组织分化程度的增加存在线性相关,其中与肿瘤浸润深度相关性最大,浸润程度深胃癌患者更容易发生神经侵犯,建议有神经侵犯的患者可采取更积极的治疗,以改善患者预后。

参考文献

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Sung, H., et al. (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 71, 209-249.
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660
[2] Ajani, J.A., et al. (2016) Gastric Cancer, Version 3.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 14, 1286-1312.
https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2016.0137
[3] Ondicova, K. and Mravec, B. (2010) Role of Nervous System in Cancer Aetiopathogenesis. The Lancet Oncology, 11, 596-601.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70337-7
[4] Monje, M. (2017) Settling a Nervous Stomach: The Neural Regulation of Enteric Cancer. Cancer Cell, 31, 1-2.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccell.2016.12.008
[5] Zhang, M., Xian, H.-C., Dai, L., Tang, Y.-L. and Liang, X.-H. (2021) MicroRNAs: Emerging Driver of Cancer Perineural Invasion. Cell & Bioscience, 11, Article No. 117.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13578-021-00630-4
[6] Jobling, P., et al. (2015) Nerve-Cancer Cell Cross-talk: A Novel Promoter of Tumor Progression. Cancer Research, 75, 1777-1781.
https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-3180
[7] Xia, Q., et al. (2015) Interaction between Gastric Carcinoma Cells and Neural Cells Promotes Perineural Invasion by a Pathway Involving VCAM1. Digestive Diseases and Sciences, 60, 3283-3292.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-015-3758-x
[8] Zhou, Z.H., Zhang, J.-D., Zhao, H.-B. and Wu, Y.-Y. (2015) Diameter of Involved Nerves Is a Valuable Prognostic Factor for Gastric Cancer. Histology & Histopathology, 30, 1121-1127.
[9] Hakanson, R., et al. (1984) The Vagus Exerts Trophic Control of the Stomach in the Rat. Gastroenter-ology, 86, 28-32.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-5085(84)90586-9
[10] Liebig, C., et al. (2009) Perineural Invasion Is an Independent Predictor of Outcome in Colorectal Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 27, 5131-5137.
https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.4949
[11] Wang, H., et al. (2023) Perineural Invasion in Colorectal Cancer: Mechanisms of Action and Clinical Relevance. Cellular Oncology.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13402-023-00857-y
[12] Tao, Q., et al. (2020) Perineural Invasion and Postoperative Ad-juvant Chemotherapy Efficacy in Patients with Gastric Cancer. Frontiers in Oncology, 10, Article 530.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00530
[13] Zhou, Y., et al. (2015) Clinical Significance of Perineural Invasion in Stages II and III Colorectal Cancer. Pathology—Research and Practice, 211, 839-844.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prp.2015.09.001
[14] Zhu, Y., et al. (2019) Perineural Invasion in Cervical Cancer: Pay Attention to the Indications of Nerve-Sparing Radical Hysterectomy. Annals of Translational Medicine, 7, Article No. 203.
https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2019.04.35
[15] Santoro, A., et al. (2022) Prognostic Role of Perineural Invasion in Vulvar Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 48, 2354-2359.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2022.06.031
[16] Zhu, S. and Mendenhall, W.M. (2018) Radiotherapy for Melanoma with Perineural Invasion: University of Florida Experience. Cancer Investigation, 36, 389-394.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07357907.2018.1504055
[17] Zhou, X., et al. (2018) The Role of Perineural Invasion in Penile Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review. Bioscience Reports, 38, Article ID: BSR20180333.
https://doi.org/10.1042/BSR20180333
[18] Niu, Y., Forster, S. and Muders, M. (2022) The Role of Perineural In-vasion in Prostate Cancer and Its Prognostic Significance. Cancers, 14, Article No. 4065.
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174065
[19] Marchesi, F., Piemonti, L., Mantovani, A. and Allavena, P. (2010) Molecular Mechanisms of Perineural Invasion, a Forgotten Pathway of Dissemination and Metastasis. Cytokine & Growth Factor Reviews, 21, 77-82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cytogfr.2009.11.001
[20] Zhao, B., et al. (2020) Perineural Invasion as a Predictive Factor for Survival Outcome in Gastric Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Pathology, 73, 544-551.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2019-206372
[21] Woodham, B.L., Chmelo, J., Donohoe, C.L., Madhavan, A. and Phillips, A.W. (2020) Prognostic Significance of Lymphatic, Venous and Perineural Invasion after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Gastric Adenocarcinoma. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 27, 3296-3304.
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-08389-7
[22] Uzun, O., et al. (2021) Prognostic Effect of Perineural Invasion in Successive Years in Patients with Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer. Indian Journal of Pathology & Microbiology, 64, 479-483.
https://doi.org/10.4103/IJPM.IJPM_612_20
[23] Scartozzi, M., et al. (2006) Lymphatic, Blood Vessel and Peri-neural Invasion Identifies Early-Stage High-Risk Radically Resected Gastric Cancer Patients. British Journal of Cancer, 95, 445-449.
https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6603286
[24] Aurello, P., et al. (2017) Influence of Perineural Invasion in Predicting Overall Survival and Disease-Free Survival in Patients with Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer. The Ameri-can Journal of Surgery, 213, 748-753.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.05.022
[25] Tanaka, A., Watanabe, T., Okuno, K. and Yasutomi, M. (1994) Perineural Invasion as a Predictor of Recurrence of Gastric Cancer. Cancer, 73, 550-555.
https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19940201)73:3<550::AID-CNCR2820730309>3.0.CO;2-0
[26] Zhang, F., et al. (2023) Lymphovascular or Perineural Invasion Is Associated with Lymph Node Metastasis and Survival Outcomes in Patients with Gastric Cancer. Cancer Medicine, 12, 9401-9408.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.5701
[27] Yang, K., et al. (2021) The Impact of Nerve Involvement on the Prognosis of Gastric Cancer Patients with Curative Gastrectomy: An International Multicenter Analysis. Disease Markers, 2021, Article ID: 8870562.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8870562
[28] Luo, T., Fang, G., Bi, J. and Ma, L. (2008) The Effect of Perineural In-vasion on Overall Survival in Patients with Gastric Carcinoma. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 12, 1263-1267.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-008-0529-4