DOI 10.1007/s10120-020-01113-0
Gastric cancer is highly prevalent in Lynch syndrome patients with atrophic gastritis.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Although gastric cancer is one of the Lynch syndrome (LS)-related tumors, the clinicopathological features of gastric cancer in patients with LS remain uncertain. To investigate the incidence risk and clinicopathological features of gastric neoplasms in LS, we conducted a retrospective cohort study in Japanese LS patients.
METHODS
LS patients with pathogenic mismatch repair (MMR) gene variants were extracted from the LS registry of the National Cancer Center Hospital, Japan. Cumulative risks of gastric neoplasm, including dysplasia and cancer, were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Gastric atrophy was evaluated endoscopically and/or histologically. Immunohistochemical staining for MMR proteins was performed for all available specimens.
RESULTS
Of 118 eligible patients, 26 patients were diagnosed with 58 gastric neoplasms. The cumulative incidence of gastric neoplasm was 41.0% (95% confidence interval, 26.9-55.0) at the age of 70. Of these, 13 (50%) patients developed synchronous and/or metachronous multiple gastric neoplasms. Among the 49 gastric neoplasms available for detailed pathological evaluation, all were associated with intestinal metaplasia. Immunohistochemically, 42 (86%) were MMR-deficient. The individuals with gastric atrophy had a significantly higher risk of developing gastric neoplasms compared with those without gastric atrophy (26 cases/54 individuals vs. 0 cases/53 individuals) (P = 0.026).
CONCLUSION
LS patients, particularly those with atrophic gastritis, are at high risk of gastric neoplasm and often develop multiple tumors. Endoscopic surveillance for gastric cancer is recommended for LS patients, especially those with atrophic gastritis.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.