Comparison of Surgery Plus Chemotherapy and Palliative Chemotherapy Alone for Advanced  Gastric Cancer with Krukenberg Tumor

Jang Ho Cho; Jae Yun Lim; Ah Ran Choi; Sung Min Choi; Jong Won Kim; Seung Ho Choi; Jae Yong Cho

doi:10.4143/crt.2013.175

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Cancer Res Treat > Volume 47(4); 2015 > Article

Original Article Comparison of Surgery Plus Chemotherapy and Palliative Chemotherapy Alone for Advanced Gastric Cancer with Krukenberg Tumor: Jang Ho Cho, MD¹, Jae Yun Lim, MD, PhD¹, Ah Ran Choi, MD¹, Sung Min Choi, MD¹, Jong Won Kim, MD², Seung Ho Choi, MD, PhD², Jae Yong Cho, MD, PhD^1,; Cancer Research and Treatment : Official Journal of Korean Cancer Association 2015;47(4):697-705.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2013.175
Published online: November 27, 2014

¹Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

²Department of Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence: Jae Yong Cho, MD, PhD Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 211 Eonju-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul 06273, Korea
Tel: 82-2-2019-4363 Fax: 82-2-3463-3882 E-mail: chojy@yuhs.ac

• Received: September 12, 2013 • Accepted: June 15, 2014

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

21,278 Views
393 Download
35 Web of Science
29 Crossref
46 Scopus

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
NOTES
REFERENCES

This article has been corrected. See "ERRATUM: Comparison of Surgery Plus Chemotherapy and Palliative Chemotherapy Alone for Advanced Gastric Cancer with Krukenberg Tumor" in Volume 50 on page 302.

Abstract

Purpose
This study was conducted to validate the survival benefit of metastasectomy plus chemotherapy over chemotherapy alone for treatment of Krukenberg tumors from gastric cancer and to identify prognostic factors for survival.
Materials and Methods
Clinical data from 216 patients with Krukenberg tumors from gastric cancer were collected. Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy and arm B, chemotherapy alone.
Results
Overall survival (OS) was significantly increased in arm A relative to arm B for patients initially diagnosed with stage IV gastric cancer (18.0 months vs. 8.0 months; p < 0.001) and those with recurrent Krukenberg tumors (19.0 months vs. 9.0 months; p=0.002), respectively. Metastasectomy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.458; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.287 to 0.732; p=0.001), signet-ring cell pathology (HR, 1.583; 95% CI, 1.057 to 2.371; p=0.026), and peritoneal carcinomatosis (HR, 3.081; 95% CI, 1.610 to 5.895; p=0.001) were significant prognostic factors for survival.
Conclusion
Metastasectomy plus chemotherapy offers superior OS when compared to palliative chemotherapy alone in gastric cancer with Krukenberg tumor. Prolonged survival applies to all patients, regardless of gastric cancer stage. Metastasectomy, signet-ring cell pathology, and peritoneal carcinomatosis were prognostic factors for survival. Future prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm the optimal treatment strategy for Krukenberg tumors from gastric cancer.
Key words: Krukenberg tumor, Metastasectomy, Prognosis, Stomach neoplasms

Introduction

Gastric cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. In Western countries, the incidence of gastric cancer has been decreasing, whereas it remains a main cause of cancer-related death in Korea. Gastric cancer infrequently metastasizes to the ovary, a hormone-related organ. The incidence of ovarian metastasis or Krukenberg tumor after curative resection of gastric cancer is approximately 0.3%-6.7% [1,2]; however, some autopsy studies have reported incidence rates ranging from 33% to 41% [1,2].

Krukenberg tumor is associated with poor prognosis in gastric cancer [3,4]. In female patients, one of the most important causes of treatment failure for gastric cancer is an ovarian relapse [5,6]. Significant advances have been made in understanding the molecular biology of many cancers. However, the underlying mechanism of the intratumor heterogeneity of gastric cancer has not been clearly established. Furthermore, the prognostic factors and treatment guidelines for patients diagnosed with Krukenberg tumor of gastric origin are insufficient.

Although systemic chemotherapy is the optimal treatment strategy for recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer, it has not provided significant survival benefits. Therefore, several treatment strategies have been investigated to improve overall survival (OS) in metastatic gastric cancer patients with oligometastases or limited metastasis. Several local treatments including metastasectomy, radiofrequency ablation, and stereotactic body radiation therapy have shown impressive results [7,8]. Additionally, resection of metastatic lesions has been shown to increase OS in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with operable liver and lung metastases [9-12]. Therefore, National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend metastasectomy for operable lung and liver lesions in CRC. However, the survival benefit of metastasectomy has not been clearly validated for Krukenberg tumors in gastric cancer. Most Krukenberg tumors are diagnosed metachronously, and only a few patients with Krukenberg tumor are clinically diagnosed synchronously. In most hospitals, patients initially diagnosed with ovarian metastasis in advanced gastric cancer are primarily treated with chemotherapy. However, there is limited clinical data available regarding the survival benefit of ovarian metastasectomy in patients with advanced gastric cancer [13]. Moreover, controversies regarding the best treatment strategy for Krukenberg tumor in gastric cancer have caused confusion among physicians. Therefore, we investigated the survival benefit of ovarian metastasectomy in synchronous or metachronous Krukenberg tumor in gastric cancer.

Materials and Methods

1. Patients

Of 27,103 patients who were diagnosed with gastric cancer between March 2004 and February 2012 at Yonsei University Medical Center, 9,217 (34%) were women. Among female gastric cancer patients, 216 with Krukenberg tumor detected by abdominal-pelvis computed tomography (CT) or gynecologic ultrasonography were included in this study and reviewed retrospectively (Severance Hospital, n=172; Gangnam Severance Hospital, n=44). Patient information was obtained from outpatient clinical or admission records and information regarding patient survival was obtained from the Korean National Statistics Registry Database. The protocols were approved by the Yonsei University Health System Institutional Review Board.

In general, curative surgery plays an important role in gastric cancer without distant metastasis. Therefore, for data analysis, patients were divided into two groups according to initial gastric cancer stage: stage I-III and stage IV. Patients received surgery or palliative chemotherapy according to the initial disease stage. Patients suspected of having Krukenberg tumor underwent imaging studies to confirm disease resectability. However, 87% of patients (93/107) who underwent oophorectomy had disease that already extended beyond the ovary, in which case oophorectomy was performed for palliative symptom control. The residual disease state of each patient was documented as the presence or absence of gross residual disease, which was classified as negative resection margins (R0), microscopic tumor infiltration (R1), and macroscopic residual tumor (R2). R0 resection was achieved in only 38% (41/107) of patients who underwent oophorectomy.

Overall, 125 patients were initially diagnosed with stage IV gastric cancer and 91 with recurrent Krukenberg tumor after they underwent curative resection of gastric cancer. Among the patients initially diagnosed with stage IV gastric cancer, Krukenberg tumors were detected synchronously and metachronously in 84 patients and 41 patients, respectively.

To compare OS, patients with initial stage IV gastric cancer (n=125) were divided into two arms according to treatment modality. Arm A1 comprised 49 patients who received both chemotherapy and metastasectomy for Krukenberg tumor. Arm B1 comprised 76 patients who received chemotherapy alone. Patients with recurrent Krukenberg tumor (n=91) were assigned to arm A2 or arm B2. Arm A2 comprised 58 patients who received chemotherapy and metastasectomy for recurrent Krukenberg tumor, and arm B2 comprised 33 patients who received chemotherapy alone. In arms A1 and B1, OS was defined as the time from the date of pathologic diagnosis of gastric cancer to the date of death or last follow-up. In arms A2 and B2, OS was defined as the time from the date of Krukenberg tumor diagnosis by imaging to the date of death or last follow-up.

2. Statistical analyses

All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS ver. 20.0 (IBM Co., Armonk, NY). For continuous variables, two-tailed Student t tests were used to compare the demographic and clinical characteristics between patient arms. For discrete variables, a chi-square test was used. Survival rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The influence of the covariates on survival length between treatment arms was assessed using the log-rank test. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered significant. Significant variables in the univariate analysis were entered into multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

1. Clinical characteristics

The median follow-up duration for all patients was 30.0 months until the OS data cutoff date (June 30, 2013), at which time 90% of the patients had discontinued treatment. The median age of patients at Krukenberg tumor diagnosis was 43.4 years (range, 21 to 78 years) and the average size of metastatic ovarian tumors was 6.8 cm (range, 1.5 to 24 cm).

The clinical characteristics of patients with initial stage IV gastric cancer (n=125) are listed in Table 1. Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone. Comparison of the patients who received chemotherapy plus metastasectomy revealed they had significantly larger Krukenberg tumors (median size, 7.99 cm vs. 5.76 cm; p=0.004), fewer metastases outside the ovaries (85.7% vs. 97.4%; p=0.028), and a more normal range of serum cancer antigen (CA) 19-9 level (65.3% vs. 39.5%; p=0.009) than patients who received chemotherapy alone.

The clinical characteristics of patients with recurrent Krukenberg tumor of gastric origin (n=91) are listed in Table 2. Patients who received chemotherapy plus metastasectomy had significantly higher frequency of bilateral tumors (72.4% vs. 48.5%; p=0.022), and a more normal range of serum CA 19-9 level (65.6% vs. 45.5%; p=0.035) than those who received chemotherapy alone.

2. Treatment outcome

The median OS of patients with initial stage IV gastric cancer was 12.0 months (95% CI, 9.7 to 14.3 months). The median OS of arm A1 and arm B1 was 18.0 months (95% CI, 15.2 to 20.8 months) and 8.0 months (95% CI, 6.6 to 9.4 months), respectively. Therefore, patients in the chemotherapy plus metastasectomy arm had a significantly better OS than patients in the chemotherapy arm (p < 0.001) (Fig. 1).

The median OS of patients with recurrent Krukenberg tumors was 15.0 months (95% CI, 12.7 to 17.3 months). The median OS time of arm A2 and arm B2 was 19.0 months (95% CI, 14.4 to 23.6 months) and 9.0 months (95% CI, 6.2 to 11.8 months), respectively. Patients in the chemotherapy plus metastasectomy arm had a significantly better OS than patients in the chemotherapy alone arm (p=0.002) (Fig. 2).

Upon univariate analysis of all patients, metastasectomy, signet-ring cell pathology, presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis, gastrectomy, and elevated serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA; >5 ng/mL), CA 19-9 (>24 U/mL), and CA-125 (>35 U/mL) were prognostic factors associated with survival. After adjusting for covariates in multivariate analysis, metastasectomy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.458; 95% CI, 0.287 to 0.732; p=0.001), signet-ring cell pathology (HR, 1.583; 95% CI, 1.057 to 2.371; p=0.026), and presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis (HR, 3.081; 95% CI, 1.610 to 5.895; p=0.001) were independent predictors of OS (Table 3).

It was difficult to statistically analyze survival differences between patients in whom metastasis was limited to the ovary and those who have metastasis beyond the ovary because only 8% of patients showed metastasis limited to the ovary. Most of these patients were alive at the time of the study. A few patients who showed metastasis to other sites were subjected to additional surgery with oophorectomy, such as total hysterectomy and bowel resection.

As shown in Fig. 3, the R0 resection group (n=41) had a significantly longer OS (HR, 0.405; 95% CI, 0.254 to 0.646; log-rank p < 0.001) than the R1, R2 resection group (n=66). The median OS was 30.0 months (95% CI, 24.0 to 36.0) in the R0 resection group and 15.0 months (95% CI, 13.6 to 16.4) in the R1, R2 resection group.

Oophorectomy was found to still be beneficial when other unresectable metastasis were present, for both metastatic and recurrent disease. Analysis of all cases except single ovarian metastasis revealed that the median OS time of arm A1 and arm B1 was 16.0 months (95% CI, 13.7 to 18.3 months) and 8.0 months (95% CI, 6.6 to 9.4 months; p < 0.001), respectively. Additionally, the median OS time of arm A2 and arm B2 was 16.0 months (95% CI, 12.5 to 19.5 months) and 8.0 months (95% CI, 5.8 to 10.2 months; p=0.039), respectively.

The frequencies and response rates of chemotherapy regimens initially used after ovarian metastasis diagnosis were also analyzed (Table 4). Overall, 111 patients were treated with chemotherapy for ovarian metastasis, with platinum (n=43), taxane (n=26), and irinotecan (n=8) chemotherapy regimens being the most frequently used. Chemotherapy regimens did not differ significantly between arms A and B (p=0.535). Patients who received chemotherapy for ovarian metastasis were evaluated using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors ver. 1.1. Tumor assessment included measurable metastatic ovarian lesions and not overall gastric cancer lesions. The response rates for the chemotherapy regimens were as follows: platinum, 26%; irinotecan, 25%; and taxane, 12%.

Discussion

Most patients diagnosed with Krukenberg tumor of gastric origin have poor prognosis. Many studies have shown that the median survival after Krukenberg tumor diagnosis is 7-11 months [13]. In the past, symptomatic patients received palliative operation for symptom relief. Recently, the development of diagnostic tools has increased early detection of Krukenberg tumors and their curative resectability. Nevertheless, the optimal treatment strategy for Krukenberg tumors has not been established.

Our study showed that patients with Krukenberg tumor of gastric origin who underwent both chemotherapy plus metastasectomy had longer OS than those who underwent chemotherapy alone, regardless of stage. The difference in OS was actually underestimated because the OS in arms A2 and B2 was determined from the date of recurrent Krukenberg tumor diagnosis and not the date of the initial gastric cancer diagnosis. Despite the small proportion of R0 resections, a prolonged OS was observed in the chemotherapy plus metastasectomy arm. In our study, one patient in arm A1 survived more than 9 years after the initial diagnosis of gastric cancer, while one patient in arm A2 survived more than 7.5 years after resection of metachronous Krukenberg tumor.

Some studies have reported the survival benefit of metastasectomy for Krukenberg tumor; however, most of these included a small number of patients (approximately 50 patients) and Krukenberg tumors of different origins, including gastric, colon, and breast cancers [14]. Many reports have suggested that metastasectomy provides a better survival benefit for Krukenberg tumors of CRC origin [15-17]. Among studies of the survival benefit of metastasectomy for Krukenberg tumor, ours is the largest conducted to date and the only one that investigated Krukenberg tumors of gastric cancer origin exclusively. A few studies have demonstrated that metastasectomy of metachronous recurrent Krukenberg tumor of gastric origin provided longer OS [18-20]. Based on our results, metastasectomy should be performed in stage IV gastric cancer patients diagnosed synchronously or metachronously with Krukenberg tumor. Our recommendation is consistent with those of previous reports [21,22].

In the present study, the prognostic factors associated with survival in patients with Krukenberg tumor of gastric origin were analyzed. Metastasectomy, signet-ring cell pathology, and peritoneal carcinomatosis were identified as significant prognostic factors. Several studies have also shown that metastasectomy is a prognostic factor for better OS in patients with Krukenberg tumors [18,19]. In the present study, absence of peritoneal carcinomatosis was associated with better prognosis, which is consistent with the results of a previous study that showed limited disease extent as a prognostic factor [2]. Complete resection is easily achieved when the extent of disease is limited; therefore, active Krukenberg tumor metastasectomy should be conducted in patients who are not expected to have residual disease after operation. Adenocarcinomas composed of signet ring cells tend to metastasize to the ovaries more frequently than adenocarcinomas of other histologic types [23]. Signet ring cell features have not been well established as a prognostic factor for Krukenberg tumors; however, in the present study, they were a poor prognostic factor for Krukenberg tumors of gastric cancer origin.

Published studies of the role of chemotherapy in the treatment of Krukenberg tumors have included only small patient numbers or case reports. In the present study, response rates to chemotherapy regimens were analyzed in 111 patients diagnosed with Krukenberg tumor, and response rates ranged from 12% to 26%. In most of our cases, Krukenberg tumor was diagnosed during later stages of gastric cancer progression. Therefore, at the time of Krukenberg tumor diagnosis, patients have already received standard first-line chemotherapy for advanced or metastatic gastric cancer.

In our experience, ovarian metastases show less chemotherapy responsiveness than other sites of metastasis. Early detection of ovarian metastases is important to successful treatment. In the present study, serum CEA, CA 19-9, and CA-125 level were not useful predictors of Krukenberg tumor. Despite continual efforts to develop a practical biomarker that can predict relapse or metastasis of ovary metastasis with gastric cancer, no clinical tests have been established [24].

Clinical heterogeneity is most likely due to the diverse molecular profile of gastric cancer. Thus, identifying diversity in the molecular profile of gastric cancer that governs the clinical behavior of tumors could lead to new and more effective clinical strategies. Recent studies of gastric cancer have identified genes that differ according to histologic factors and age, as well as those useful for gastric cancer prognosis prediction [24]. We will continue to identify genes and develop a practical biomarker in future studies.

It should be noted that several factors may have affected the decision of surgery for treatment of the patients evaluated in the present study, including the extent of metastasis, possibility of curative surgery, surgeon’s opinion, etc. Additionally, the difference in the chemotherapy regimen between arm A and arm B may have influenced patient survival or toxicity.

CT was used to identify patients who would benefit from the curative resection of Krukenberg tumors. Although imaging modalities, including CT scanning, have been developed to detect intraperitoneal metastasis, CT has been shown to only have a 50% accuracy for detecting intraperitoneal metastatic cancers [25]. Therefore, peritoneal carcinomatosis is difficult to diagnosis by CT scan. Laparoscopic examination has shown better accuracy in detecting peritoneal carcinomatosis; however, this procedure is invasive and can result in complications.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we demonstrated that metastasectomy was associated with longer survival in patients with Krukenberg tumors in gastric cancer. Therefore, metastasectomy should be performed in stage IV gastric cancer patients diagnosed synchronously or metachronously with Krukenberg tumor. Our data also suggest that metastasectomy plus chemotherapy may play a role in the treatment of Krukenberg tumors of gastric origin. Furthermore, we found that metastasectomy, signet ring cells, and peritoneal carcinomatosis were prognostic factors for Krukenberg tumors. Future prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm our findings and will be important in establishing standard treatment guidelines for patients with Krukenberg tumor in metastatic gastric cancer.

NOTES

Conflict of interest relevant to this article was not reported.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a CMB-Yuhan research grant from the Yonsei University College of Medicine (6-2013-0065) and the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (No. 2010-0024248).

Fig. 1.

Kaplan-Meier overall survival based on treatment arm in initial stage IV gastric cancer. Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone.

Fig. 2.

Kaplan-Meier overall survival based on treatment arm with recurred Krukenberg tumor. Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone.

Fig. 3.

Kaplan-Meier overall survival based on curative resection of Krukenberg tumor in stomach cancer. The residual disease state of each patient was documented as the presence or absence of gross residual disease, which was classified as negative resection margins (R0), microscopic tumor infiltration (R1), and macroscopic residual tumor (R2).

Table 1.

Clinical characteristics of 125 patients with initial stage IV gastric cancer

Variable	Arm A1^a) (n=58)	Arm B1^a) (n=33)	p-value^b)
Median age (yr)	43.3 (26-69)	42.1 (27-72)	0.428
< 50	39 (80.0)	64 (84.2)	0.508
≥ 50	10 (20.4)	12 (15.8)	-
Laterality			0.315
Bilateral	37 (75.5)	51 (67.0)	-
Unilateral	12 (24.5)	25 (33.0)	-
Krukenberg tumor size (cm)	7.99 (3.4-19)	5.76 (1.5-24)	0.004
Pathologic differentiation			0.236
WD-MD	7 (14.3)	6 ( 7.9)	-
PD-SRC	42 (85.7)	69 (90.8)	-
Chronology			0.676
Synchronous	34 (69.3)	50 (65.8)	-
Metachronous	15 (30.6)	26 (34.2)	-
Metastasis site
Peritoneum	38 (77.6)	66 (86.8)	0.175
Liver	6 (12.2)	10 (13.2)	0.881
Bone	5 (10.2)	11 (14.4)	0.723
Lung	2 (4.1)	5 (6.6)	0.704
Other	23 (46.9)	32 (42.1)	0.699
Extent of disease			0.028
Limited to the ovary	7 (14.3)	2 (2.6)	-
Beyond the ovary	42 (85.7)	74 (97.4)	-
R status
R0 resection	14 (28.6)	-	-
R2 resection	35 (71.4)	-	-
Serum CEA (ng/mL)	3.05 (0.01-36.3)	5.80 (0.01-121)	0.277
Normal	41 (83.7)	56 (73.7)	0.083
> 5	4 (8.2)	15 (19.7)	-
Serum CA 19-9 (U/mL)	96.64 (0.1-1,850)	484.5 (0.1-12,100)	0.067
Normal	32 (65.3)	30 (39.5)	0.009
> 24	14 (28.6)	37 (48.7)	-
Serum CA-125 (U/mL)	74.1 (5.5-244)	187 (11-1,555)	0.051
Normal	14 (28.6)	11 (14.5)	0.159
> 35	14 (28.6)	23 (30.3)	-

Values are presented as median (range) or number (%). WD-MD, well differentiated adenocarcinoma and moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma; PD-SRC, poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma and signet ring cell carcinoma; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CA, cancer antigen.

^a) Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone,

^b) p-values from chi-square test except for Krukenberg tumor size, and median age at Krukenberg tumor diagnosis, which were determined by a two-tailed Student t test.

Table 2.

Clinical characteristics of 91 patients with recurrent Krukenberg tumor

Variable	Arm A2^a) (n=58)	Arm B2^a) (n=33)	p-value^b)
Median age (yr)	43.9 (21-78)	45.9 (25-75)	0.372
< 50	41 (70.7)	18 (54.5)	0.121
≥ 50	17 (29.3)	15 (45.5)	-
Relapse free survival (mo)	24.3 (3-109)	27.8 (4-91)	0.435
Laterality			0.022
Bilateral	42 (72.4)	16 (48.5)	-
Unilateral	16 (27.6)	17 (51.5)	-
Krukenberg tumor size (cm)	7.39 (3-18)	5.95 (1.9-15)	0.068
Pathologic differentiation			0.499
WD-MD	6 (10.3)	5 (15.2)	-
PD-SRC	52 (89.7)	28 (84.8)	-
AJCC stage			0.824
I, II	26 (44.8)	14 (42.4)	-
III	32 (55.2)	19 (57.6)	-
Metastasis site
Peritoneum	45 (77.6)	26 (78.8)	0.894
Liver	4 (6.9)	4 (12.1)	0.454
Bone	6 (10.3)	5 (15.2)	0.519
Lung	2 (3.4)	0 (0)	0.533
Other	33 (56.9)	13 (39.4)	0.108
Extent of disease			0.25
Limited to the ovary	7 (12.1)	1 (3.0)	-
Beyond the ovary	51 (87.9)	32 (97.0)	-
R status
R0 resection	27 (46.6)	-	-
R2 resection	31 (53.4)	-	-
Serum CEA (ng/mL)	2.79 (0.13-22.2)	332 (0.65-10,410)	0.319
Normal	44 (75.9)	24 (72.7)	0.276
> 5	8 (13.8)	8 (24.2)	-
Serum CA 19-9 (U/mL)	118.73 (0.1-2,270)	1,702 (0.1-20,000)	0.097
Normal	38 (65.6)	15 (45.5)	0.035
> 24	14 (25.0)	15 (45.5)	-
Serum CA-125 (U/mL)	36.4 (4-241)	60.82 (5-227.8)	0.117
Normal	33 (56.9)	10 (30.3)	0.08
> 35	11 (19.0)	9 (27.3)	-

^a) Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone,

^b) p-values from chi-square test except for Krukenberg tumor size, median age at Krukenberg tumor diagnosis, and relapse free survival, which were determined by a two-tailed Student t test.

Table 3.

Univariate and multivariate analysis showing factors associated with overall survival in 216 patients

Variable	Univariate		Multivariate
Variable	HR (95% CI)	p-value	HR (95% CI)	p-value
Metastasectomy	0.404 (0.302-0.539)	< 0.001	0.458 (0.287-0.732)	0.001
Age (≥ 50 yr)	1.065 (0.769-1.477)	0.704	-	-
Metachronous disease	0.870 (0.587-1.289)	0.487	-	-
Unilateral ovarian metastases	1.097 (0.809-1.487)	0.552	-	-
Size of Krukenberg tumor (< 5 cm)	0.749 (0.547-1.024)	0.070	-	-
Signet-ring cells	0.642 (0.479-0.859)	0.003	1.583 (1.057-2.371)	0.026
Peritoneal carcinomatosis	3.034 (1.990-4.625)	< 0.001	3.081 (1.610-5.895)	0.001
Gastrectomy	2.022 (1.507-2.712)	< 0.001	1.293 (0.787-2.124)	0.311
Relapse free survival (≥ 12 mo)	1.433 (0.958-2.144)	0.080	-	-
CEA	1.434 (1.061-1.938)	0.052	-	-
CA 19-9	1.614 (1.193-2.182)	0.002	0.683 (0.447-1.042)	0.077
CA-125	2.091 (1.420-3.078)	< 0.001	0.653 (0.421-1.014)	0.057

HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CA, cancer antigen.

Table 4.

Frequencies and response rates of chemotherapy regimens initially used after ovarian metastasis diagnosis

Variable	Arm A1^a)		Arm A2		Arm B1		Arm B2		Total
Variable	No.	RR (%)^b)	No.	RR (%)	No.	RR (%)	No.	RR (%)	No.	RR (%)
Platinum^c)	8	25	1	0	21	14	13	46	43	26
Irinotecan^d)	0	0	0	0	4	25	4	25	8	25
Taxane^e)	4	0	2	0	17	18	3	0	26	12
Total	12	17	3	0	42	17	20	35	77	21

^a) Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone,

^b) RR, response rate (comlete response or partial response patients/total patients),

^c) Cisplatin+TS-1, cisplatin+capecitabine (XP), cisplatin+5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (FP), oxaliplatin+capecitabine (XELOX), oxaliplatin+5-FU/leucovorin (LV) (FOLFOX), oxaliplatin+TS-1 (SOX),

^d) Irinotecan mono, irinotecan+TS-1, irinotecan+5-FU/LV (FOLFIRI),

^e) Paclitaxel mono, paclitaxel+5-FU/LV, paclitaxel+TS-1, docetaxel mono, docetaxel+5-FU/LV, docetaxel+TS-1, docetaxel+capecitabine.

REFERENCES

1. Wang J, Shi YK, Wu LY, Wang JW, Yang S, Yang JL, et al. Prognostic factors for ovarian metastases from primary gastric cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18:825–32. Article PubMed
2. Kim HK, Heo DS, Bang YJ, Kim NK. Prognostic factors of Krukenberg's tumor. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;82:105–9. Article PubMed
3. Petru E, Pickel H, Heydarfadai M, Lahousen M, Haas J, Schaider H, et al. Nongenital cancers metastatic to the ovary. Gynecol Oncol. 1992;44:83–6. Article PubMed
4. Hale RW. Krukenberg tumor of the ovaries: a review of 81 records. Obstet Gynecol. 1968;32:221–5. PubMed
5. Duarte I, Llanos O. Patterns of metastases in intestinal and diffuse types of carcinoma of the stomach. Hum Pathol. 1981;12:237–42. Article PubMed
6. Saphir O. Signet-ring cell carcinoma. Mil Surg. 1951;109:360–9. Article PubMed
7. Kim KH, Lee KW, Baek SK, Chang HJ, Kim YJ, Park DJ, et al. Survival benefit of gastrectomy ± metastasectomy in patients with metastatic gastric cancer receiving chemotherapy. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14:130–8. Article PubMed
8. Cheon SH, Rha SY, Jeung HC, Im CK, Kim SH, Kim HR, et al. Survival benefit of combined curative resection of the stomach (D2 resection) and liver in gastric cancer patients with liver metastases. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:1146–53. Article PubMed
9. Elias D, Cavalcanti A, Sabourin JC, Lassau N, Pignon JP, Ducreux M, et al. Resection of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: the real impact of the surgical margin. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1998;24:174–9. Article PubMed
10. Nordlinger B, Guiguet M, Vaillant JC, Balladur P, Boudjema K, Bachellier P, et al. Surgical resection of colorectal carcinoma metastases to the liver: a prognostic scoring system to improve case selection, based on 1568 patients. Association Francaise de Chirurgie. Cancer. 1996;77:1254–62. Article PubMed
11. Iwatsuki S, Esquivel CO, Gordon RD, Starzl TE. Liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. Surgery. 1986;100:804–10. PubMed PMC
12. Imamura H, Matsuyama Y, Shimada R, Kubota M, Nakayama A, Kobayashi A, et al. A study of factors influencing prognosis after resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal and gastric carcinoma. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:3178–84. Article PubMed
13. Kiyokawa T, Young RH, Scully RE. Krukenberg tumors of the ovary: a clinicopathologic analysis of 120 cases with emphasis on their variable pathologic manifestations. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30:277–99. Article PubMed
14. Ekbom GA, Gleysteen JJ. Gastric malignancy: resection for palliation. Surgery. 1980;88:476–81. PubMed
15. Ayhan A, Guvenal T, Salman MC, Ozyuncu O, Sakinci M, Basaran M. The role of cytoreductive surgery in nongenital cancers metastatic to the ovaries. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;98:235–41. Article PubMed
16. Eisenkop SM, Friedman RL, Wang HJ. Complete cytoreductive surgery is feasible and maximizes survival in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol. 1998;69:103–8. Article PubMed
17. Zang RY, Zhang ZY, Li ZT, Chen J, Tang MQ, Liu Q, et al. Effect of cytoreductive surgery on survival of patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2000;75:24–30. Article PubMed
18. Kang SB, Park NH, Choi YM, Lee HP. Krukenberg tumors of the ovary: a clinical analysis of 16 cases. J Korean Cancer Assoc. 1990;22:194–201.
19. Lu LC, Shao YY, Hsu CH, Hsu C, Cheng WF, Lin YL, et al. Metastasectomy of Krukenberg tumors may be associated with survival benefits in patients with metastatic gastric cancer. Anticancer Res. 2012;32:3397–401. PubMed
20. Cheong JH, Hyung WJ, Chen J, Kim J, Choi SH, Noh SH. Survival benefit of metastasectomy for Krukenberg tumors from gastric cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2004;94:477–82. Article PubMed
21. Cheong JH, Hyung WJ, Chen J, Kim J, Choi SH, Noh SH. Surgical management and outcome of metachronous Krukenberg tumors from gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2004;87:39–45. Article PubMed
22. Nio Y, Tsubono M, Kawabata K, Masai Y, Hayashi H, Meyer C, et al. Comparison of survival curves of gastric cancer patients after surgery according to the UICC stage classification and the General Rules for Gastric Cancer Study by the Japanese Research Society for gastric cancer. Ann Surg. 1993;218:47–53. Article PubMed PMC
23. Al-Agha OM, Nicastri AD. An in-depth look at Krukenberg tumor: an overview. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:1725–30. Article PubMed PDF
24. Cho JY, Lim JY, Cheong JH, Park YY, Yoon SL, Kim SM, et al. Gene expression signature-based prognostic risk score in gastric cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:1850–7. Article PubMed PMC
25. Jacquet P, Jelinek JS, Steves MA, Sugarbaker PH. Evaluation of computed tomography in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Cancer. 1993;72:1631–6. Article PubMed

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO): Clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer, 2023
Feng‐Hua Wang, Xiao‐Tian Zhang, Lei Tang, Qi Wu, Mu‐Yan Cai, Yuan‐Fang Li, Xiu‐Juan Qu, Hong Qiu, Yu‐Jing Zhang, Jie‐Er Ying, Jun Zhang, Ling‐Yu Sun, Rong‐Bo Lin, Chang Wang, Hao Liu, Miao‐Zhen Qiu, Wen‐Long Guan, Sheng‐Xiang Rao, Jia‐Fu Ji, Yan Xin, Wei‐
Cancer Communications.2024; 44(1): 127. CrossRef
Oligometastasis of Gastric Cancer: A Review
Itaru Yasufuku, Hiroshi Tsuchiya, Seito Fujibayashi, Naoki Okumura, Yuki Sengoku, Masahiro Fukada, Ryuichi Asai, Yuta Sato, Jesse Yu Tajima, Shigeru Kiyama, Takazumi Kato, Yoshihiro Tanaka, Katsutoshi Murase, Nobuhisa Matsuhashi
Cancers.2024; 16(3): 673. CrossRef
Colorectal Origin: A Marker of Favorable Outcome in Krukenberg Tumor? Results from Clinical and Prognostic Analysis
Purnima Thakur, Mukesh Sharma, Ashish Chauhan, Kapil M. Pal, Shabnam Thakur, Manish Gupta, Shilpa Kaushal
South Asian Journal of Cancer.2024; 13(02): 099. CrossRef
Surgical resection and neoadjuvant therapy in patients with gastric cancer and ovarian metastasis: A real-world study
Hui-Ping Yan, Hong-Rui Lu, Yu-Xia Zhang, Liu Yang, Zhe-Ling Chen
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.2024; 16(8): 2426. CrossRef
Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach
Tae-Han Kim, In-Ho Kim, Seung Joo Kang, Miyoung Choi, Baek-Hui Kim, Bang Wool Eom, Bum Jun Kim, Byung-Hoon Min, Chang In Choi, Cheol Min Shin, Chung Hyun Tae, Chung sik Gong, Dong Jin Kim, Arthur Eung-Hyuck Cho, Eun Jeong Gong, Geum Jong Song, Hyeon-Su Im
Journal of Gastric Cancer.2023; 23(1): 3. CrossRef
Efficacy of chemotherapy combined with surgical resection for gastric cancer with synchronous ovarian metastasis: A propensity score matching analysis
Jingquan Fang, Xingmao Huang, Xiangliu Chen, Qi Xu, Tengjiao Chai, Ling Huang, Han Chen, Hang Chen, Zeyao Ye, Yian Du, Pengfei Yu
Cancer Medicine.2023; 12(16): 17126. CrossRef
Clinical Features of Gastric Signet Ring Cell Cancer: Results from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Mariagiulia Dal Cero, Maria Bencivenga, Drolaiz H. W. Liu, Michele Sacco, Mariella Alloggio, Kelly G. P. Kerckhoffs, Federica Filippini, Luca Saragoni, Mar Iglesias, Anna Tomezzoli, Fátima Carneiro, Heike I. Grabsch, Giuseppe Verlato, Lorena Torroni, Guil
Cancers.2023; 15(21): 5191. CrossRef
Frequency and therapeutic strategy for patients with ovarian metastasis from gastric cancer
Tsutomu Namikawa, Akira Marui, Keiichiro Yokota, Yasuhiro Kawanishi, Masaya Munekage, Sunao Uemura, Hiromichi Maeda, Hiroyuki Kitagawa, Michiya Kobayashi, Kazuhiro Hanazaki
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.2022; 407(6): 2301. CrossRef
Clinics and pathology of Krukenberg tumor: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Ruggero LIONETTI, Marcello DE LUCA, Antonio RAFFONE, Antonio TRAVAGLINO, Alberto COPPELLOTTI, Roberto PELTRINI, Umberto BRACALE, Michele D’AMBRA, Luigi INSABATO, Fulvio ZULLO, Maria D’ARMIENTO, Francesco CORCIONE
Minerva Obstetrics and Gynecology.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Seventeen-year Survival of a Case of Advanced Gastric Cancer with Krukenberg Tumor Treated by Oophorectomies, Subsequent Gastrectomy, and Chemotherapy
Yoshiro NISHIWAKI, Hideto OCHIAI, Toshikazu KANAI, Hiroaki TAMURA, Tadataka HAYASHI, Shinichiro MIYAZAKI, Shinichi HASEGAWA, Takeshi BABA
Nihon Rinsho Geka Gakkai Zasshi (Journal of Japan Surgical Association).2022; 83(4): 675. CrossRef
Gastric linitis plastica due to signet-ring cell carcinoma with Krukenberg tumors diagnosed by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration
Takeshi Okamoto, Hidekazu Suzuki, Katsuyuki Fukuda
Clinical Journal of Gastroenterology.2021; 14(4): 994. CrossRef
The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO): Clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer, 2021
Feng‐Hua Wang, Xiao‐Tian Zhang, Yuan‐Fang Li, Lei Tang, Xiu‐Juan Qu, Jie‐Er Ying, Jun Zhang, Ling‐Yu Sun, Rong‐Bo Lin, Hong Qiu, Chang Wang, Miao‐Zhen Qiu, Mu‐Yan Cai, Qi Wu, Hao Liu, Wen‐Long Guan, Ai‐Ping Zhou, Yu‐Jing Zhang, Tian‐Shu Liu, Feng Bi, Xian
Cancer Communications.2021; 41(8): 747. CrossRef
Is Routine Gastroscopy/Colonoscopy Reasonable in Patients With Suspected Ovarian Cancer: A Retrospective Study
Guochen Liu, Junping Yan, Shanshan Long, Zhimin Liu, Haifeng Gu, Hua Tu, Jundong Li
Frontiers in Oncology.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Surgical management of oligometastatic disease in gastric cancer
Peng Jin, Xiaoyan Ji, Yantao Tian
Clinics and Research in Hepatology and Gastroenterology.2020; 44(5): 638. CrossRef
The role of surgical resection before palliative chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer
Yong Won Choi, Mi Sun Ahn, Geum Sook Jeong, Hyun Woo Lee, Seong Hyun Jeong, Seok Yun Kang, Joon Seong Park, Jin-Hyuk Choi, Sang-Yong Son, Hoon Hur, Sang-Uk Han, Seung Soo Sheen
Scientific Reports.2019;[Epub] CrossRef
The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO): clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer
Feng‐Hua Wang, Lin Shen, Jin Li, Zhi‐Wei Zhou, Han Liang, Xiao‐Tian Zhang, Lei Tang, Yan Xin, Jing Jin, Yu‐Jing Zhang, Xiang‐Lin Yuan, Tian‐Shu Liu, Guo‐Xin Li, Qi Wu, Hui‐Mian Xu, Jia‐Fu Ji, Yuan‐Fang Li, Xin Wang, Shan Yu, Hao Liu, Wen‐Long Guan, Rui‐Hu
Cancer Communications.2019; 39(1): 1. CrossRef
Treatments and overall survival in patients with Krukenberg tumor
Ruggero Lionetti, Marcello De Luca, Antonio Travaglino, Antonio Raffone, Luigi Insabato, Gabriele Saccone, Massimo Mascolo, Maria D’armiento, Fulvio Zullo, Francesco Corcione
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.2019; 300(1): 15. CrossRef
Effects of metastasectomy and other factors on survival of patients with ovarian metastases from gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
Chao Zhang, Wenbin Hou, Jinyu Huang, Songcheng Yin, Pengliang Wang, Zhe Zhang, Yuen Tan, Huimian Xu
Journal of Cellular Biochemistry.2019; 120(9): 14486. CrossRef
Multi-Modality Treatment for Patients With Metastatic Gastric Cancer: A Real-World Study in China
Lin Zhao, Jiarui Li, Chunmei Bai, Yongdu Nie, Guole Lin
Frontiers in Oncology.2019;[Epub] CrossRef
Prognostic factors in Krukenberg tumor
Ruggero Lionetti, Marcello De Luca, Antonio Travaglino, Antonio Raffone, Gabriele Saccone, Antonietta Di Cicco, Luigi Insabato, Massimo Mascolo, Maria D’Armiento, Fulvio Zullo, Francesco Corcione
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.2019; 300(5): 1155. CrossRef
Palliative surgery for Krukenberg tumors – 12-year experience and review of the literature
Isaac Seow-En, Gwen Hwarng, Grace Hwei Ching Tan, Leonard Ming Li Ho, Melissa Ching Ching Teo
World Journal of Clinical Oncology.2018; 9(1): 13. CrossRef
Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotheprapy after misdiagnosed gastric cancer: Case report and review of the literature
Maciej Nowacki, Dariusz Grzanka, Wojciech Zegarski
World Journal of Gastroenterology.2018; 24(19): 2130. CrossRef
Is a Surgical Approach Justified in Metachronous Krukenberg Tumor from Gastric Cancer? A Systematic Review
Paolo Aurello, Giammauro Berardi, Laura Antolino, Giulio Antonelli, Alessia Rampini, Giovanni Moschetta, Giovanni Ramacciato
Oncology Research and Treatment.2018; 41(10): 644. CrossRef
An Unusual Cause of Acute Perforation
Najib Nassani, Liliane Deeb, Sherif Andrawes
Gastroenterology.2017; 152(5): 956. CrossRef
Krukenberg tumors: Seed, route and soil
Annamaria Agnes, Alberto Biondi, Riccardo Ricci, Valerio Gallotta, Domenico D'Ugo, Roberto Persiani
Surgical Oncology.2017; 26(4): 438. CrossRef
Comparison of a Panel of Biomarkers Between Gastric Primary Cancer and the Paired Krukenberg Tumor
Bo Wang, Ke Sun, Yinying Zou
Applied Immunohistochemistry & Molecular Morphology.2017; 25(9): 639. CrossRef
Treatment strategy and prognostic factors for Krukenberg tumors of gastric origin: report of a 10-year single-center experience from China
Pengfei Yu, Ling Huang, Guoping Cheng, Litao Yang, Gaiguo Dai, Jieer Ying, Yian Du
Oncotarget.2017; 8(47): 82558. CrossRef
Surgical treatment of gastric carcinoma with ovarian metastases
Tomasz Olesinski
Current Issues in Pharmacy and Medical Sciences.2017; 30(4): 195. CrossRef
Krukenberg Tumors of Gastric Origin: The Rationale of Surgical Resection and Perioperative Treatments in a Multicenter Western Experience
Fausto Rosa, Daniele Marrelli, Paolo Morgagni, Chiara Cipollari, Giovanni Vittimberga, Massimo Framarini, Luca Cozzaglio, Corrado Pedrazzani, Stefano Berardi, Gian Luca Baiocchi, Franco Roviello, Nazario Portolani, Giovanni de Manzoni, Guido Costamagna, G
World Journal of Surgery.2016; 40(4): 921. CrossRef

PubReader
ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Comparison of Surgery Plus Chemotherapy and Palliative Chemotherapy Alone for Advanced Gastric Cancer with Krukenberg Tumor

Cancer Res Treat. 2015;47(4):697-705. Published online November 27, 2014

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2013.175

XML Download

Figure

Comparison of Surgery Plus Chemotherapy and Palliative Chemotherapy Alone for Advanced Gastric Cancer with Krukenberg Tumor

Fig. 1. Kaplan-Meier overall survival based on treatment arm in initial stage IV gastric cancer. Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone.

Fig. 2. Kaplan-Meier overall survival based on treatment arm with recurred Krukenberg tumor. Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone.

Fig. 3. Kaplan-Meier overall survival based on curative resection of Krukenberg tumor in stomach cancer. The residual disease state of each patient was documented as the presence or absence of gross residual disease, which was classified as negative resection margins (R0), microscopic tumor infiltration (R1), and macroscopic residual tumor (R2).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Comparison of Surgery Plus Chemotherapy and Palliative Chemotherapy Alone for Advanced Gastric Cancer with Krukenberg Tumor

Variable	Arm A1^a) (n=58)	Arm B1^a) (n=33)	p-value^b)
Median age (yr)	43.3 (26-69)	42.1 (27-72)	0.428
< 50	39 (80.0)	64 (84.2)	0.508
≥ 50	10 (20.4)	12 (15.8)	-
Laterality			0.315
Bilateral	37 (75.5)	51 (67.0)	-
Unilateral	12 (24.5)	25 (33.0)	-
Krukenberg tumor size (cm)	7.99 (3.4-19)	5.76 (1.5-24)	0.004
Pathologic differentiation			0.236
WD-MD	7 (14.3)	6 ( 7.9)	-
PD-SRC	42 (85.7)	69 (90.8)	-
Chronology			0.676
Synchronous	34 (69.3)	50 (65.8)	-
Metachronous	15 (30.6)	26 (34.2)	-
Metastasis site
Peritoneum	38 (77.6)	66 (86.8)	0.175
Liver	6 (12.2)	10 (13.2)	0.881
Bone	5 (10.2)	11 (14.4)	0.723
Lung	2 (4.1)	5 (6.6)	0.704
Other	23 (46.9)	32 (42.1)	0.699
Extent of disease			0.028
Limited to the ovary	7 (14.3)	2 (2.6)	-
Beyond the ovary	42 (85.7)	74 (97.4)	-
R status
R0 resection	14 (28.6)	-	-
R2 resection	35 (71.4)	-	-
Serum CEA (ng/mL)	3.05 (0.01-36.3)	5.80 (0.01-121)	0.277
Normal	41 (83.7)	56 (73.7)	0.083
> 5	4 (8.2)	15 (19.7)	-
Serum CA 19-9 (U/mL)	96.64 (0.1-1,850)	484.5 (0.1-12,100)	0.067
Normal	32 (65.3)	30 (39.5)	0.009
> 24	14 (28.6)	37 (48.7)	-
Serum CA-125 (U/mL)	74.1 (5.5-244)	187 (11-1,555)	0.051
Normal	14 (28.6)	11 (14.5)	0.159
> 35	14 (28.6)	23 (30.3)	-

Variable	Arm A2^a) (n=58)	Arm B2^a) (n=33)	p-value^b)
Median age (yr)	43.9 (21-78)	45.9 (25-75)	0.372
< 50	41 (70.7)	18 (54.5)	0.121
≥ 50	17 (29.3)	15 (45.5)	-
Relapse free survival (mo)	24.3 (3-109)	27.8 (4-91)	0.435
Laterality			0.022
Bilateral	42 (72.4)	16 (48.5)	-
Unilateral	16 (27.6)	17 (51.5)	-
Krukenberg tumor size (cm)	7.39 (3-18)	5.95 (1.9-15)	0.068
Pathologic differentiation			0.499
WD-MD	6 (10.3)	5 (15.2)	-
PD-SRC	52 (89.7)	28 (84.8)	-
AJCC stage			0.824
I, II	26 (44.8)	14 (42.4)	-
III	32 (55.2)	19 (57.6)	-
Metastasis site
Peritoneum	45 (77.6)	26 (78.8)	0.894
Liver	4 (6.9)	4 (12.1)	0.454
Bone	6 (10.3)	5 (15.2)	0.519
Lung	2 (3.4)	0 (0)	0.533
Other	33 (56.9)	13 (39.4)	0.108
Extent of disease			0.25
Limited to the ovary	7 (12.1)	1 (3.0)	-
Beyond the ovary	51 (87.9)	32 (97.0)	-
R status
R0 resection	27 (46.6)	-	-
R2 resection	31 (53.4)	-	-
Serum CEA (ng/mL)	2.79 (0.13-22.2)	332 (0.65-10,410)	0.319
Normal	44 (75.9)	24 (72.7)	0.276
> 5	8 (13.8)	8 (24.2)	-
Serum CA 19-9 (U/mL)	118.73 (0.1-2,270)	1,702 (0.1-20,000)	0.097
Normal	38 (65.6)	15 (45.5)	0.035
> 24	14 (25.0)	15 (45.5)	-
Serum CA-125 (U/mL)	36.4 (4-241)	60.82 (5-227.8)	0.117
Normal	33 (56.9)	10 (30.3)	0.08
> 35	11 (19.0)	9 (27.3)	-

Variable	Univariate		Multivariate
Variable	HR (95% CI)	p-value	HR (95% CI)	p-value
Metastasectomy	0.404 (0.302-0.539)	< 0.001	0.458 (0.287-0.732)	0.001
Age (≥ 50 yr)	1.065 (0.769-1.477)	0.704	-	-
Metachronous disease	0.870 (0.587-1.289)	0.487	-	-
Unilateral ovarian metastases	1.097 (0.809-1.487)	0.552	-	-
Size of Krukenberg tumor (< 5 cm)	0.749 (0.547-1.024)	0.070	-	-
Signet-ring cells	0.642 (0.479-0.859)	0.003	1.583 (1.057-2.371)	0.026
Peritoneal carcinomatosis	3.034 (1.990-4.625)	< 0.001	3.081 (1.610-5.895)	0.001
Gastrectomy	2.022 (1.507-2.712)	< 0.001	1.293 (0.787-2.124)	0.311
Relapse free survival (≥ 12 mo)	1.433 (0.958-2.144)	0.080	-	-
CEA	1.434 (1.061-1.938)	0.052	-	-
CA 19-9	1.614 (1.193-2.182)	0.002	0.683 (0.447-1.042)	0.077
CA-125	2.091 (1.420-3.078)	< 0.001	0.653 (0.421-1.014)	0.057

Variable	Arm A1^a)		Arm A2		Arm B1		Arm B2		Total
Variable	No.	RR (%)^b)	No.	RR (%)	No.	RR (%)	No.	RR (%)	No.	RR (%)
Platinum^c)	8	25	1	0	21	14	13	46	43	26
Irinotecan^d)	0	0	0	0	4	25	4	25	8	25
Taxane^e)	4	0	2	0	17	18	3	0	26	12
Total	12	17	3	0	42	17	20	35	77	21

Table 1. Clinical characteristics of 125 patients with initial stage IV gastric cancer

Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone,

p-values from chi-square test except for Krukenberg tumor size, and median age at Krukenberg tumor diagnosis, which were determined by a two-tailed Student t test.

Table 2. Clinical characteristics of 91 patients with recurrent Krukenberg tumor

Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone,

p-values from chi-square test except for Krukenberg tumor size, median age at Krukenberg tumor diagnosis, and relapse free survival, which were determined by a two-tailed Student t test.

Table 3. Univariate and multivariate analysis showing factors associated with overall survival in 216 patients

HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CA, cancer antigen.

Table 4. Frequencies and response rates of chemotherapy regimens initially used after ovarian metastasis diagnosis

Patients were divided into two arms according to treatment modality: arm A, metastasectomy plus chemotherapy; arm B, chemotherapy alone,

RR, response rate (comlete response or partial response patients/total patients),

Cisplatin+TS-1, cisplatin+capecitabine (XP), cisplatin+5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (FP), oxaliplatin+capecitabine (XELOX), oxaliplatin+5-FU/leucovorin (LV) (FOLFOX), oxaliplatin+TS-1 (SOX),

Irinotecan mono, irinotecan+TS-1, irinotecan+5-FU/LV (FOLFIRI),

Paclitaxel mono, paclitaxel+5-FU/LV, paclitaxel+TS-1, docetaxel mono, docetaxel+5-FU/LV, docetaxel+TS-1, docetaxel+capecitabine.