SP3 is superior to SP5 in terms of PFS. However, since the improvement in PFS was only slight and there was no difference in OS, both SP3 and SP5 can be recommended as first-line treatments for patients with advanced GC.

Objective. We performed a meta-analysis of available studies to assess the prognostic value of circulating tumor cells detected by cytological methods for patients with gastric cancer. Methods. Two authors systematically searched the studies independently with key words in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Cochrane Library (from inception to April 2016). The estimated hazard ratio, risk ratio, odds ratio, and their 95% confidence intervals were set as effect measures. All analyses were performed by STATA 12.0. Results. Sixteen studies were included in this meta-analysis. CTCs-high status was significantly associated with poor overall survival (HR = 2.23, 95% CI: 1.86–2.66) and progression-free survival (HR = 2.02, 95% CI: 1.36–2.99). CTCs-high status was also associated with depth of infiltration (OR = 2.07, 95% CI: 1.16–3.70), regional lymph nodes metastasis (OR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.26–2.71), and distant metastasis (OR = 2.83, 95% CI: 1.77–4.52). For unresectable gastric cancer patients, CTCs-high status was significantly associated with poor overall survival, progression-free survival, and disease control rate before and during chemotherapy group. Conclusions. Our meta-analysis has evidenced the significant prognostic value of CTCs detected for both PFS and OS in gastric cancer patients. For patients treated with chemotherapy alone, we proved that CTCs detected by cytological method showed a significant prognostic value and poor response to chemotherapy.

BackgroundThe aim of our meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy and safety of the target combined chemotherapy for the patients with unresectable advanced or recurrent gastric cancer.MethodsIn accordance with the standard meta-analysis procedures, the patients included in our study were with unresectable advanced or recurrent gastric cancer and allocated randomly to receive target combined chemotherapy or the traditional chemotherapy. The search was applied to PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, Cocran’s library (from inception to February 2016). All analyses were performed by STATA 12.0, with the odds ratio, hazard ratio, and 95 % confidence interval as the effect measures.ResultsFourteen studies were included in this meta-analysis. A total of 5067 patients with advanced gastric cancer were divided into two arms: traditional chemotherapy arm and target combined chemotherapy arm. A significant improvement for overall survival (hazard ratio was 0.89, 95 % confidence interval: 0.83–0.95) and overall response rate (odds ratio was 1.44, 95 % confidence interval: 1.15–1.81) was observed, but no significant difference was found for progression-free survival (hazard ratio was 0.89, 95 % confidence interval: 0.77–1.00) in the target combined chemotherapy arm. In subgroup analysis, increasing benefits regarding overall survival and progression-free survival were found in anti epidermal growth factor receptor target drugs for selected patients subgroup and anti vascular endothelial growth factor receptor target drugs for unselected patients subgroup, but not in anti epidermal growth factor receptor target drugs for unselected patients subgroup. Besides, some adverse events were increased in the target combined chemotherapy arm.ConclusionsThe target combined chemotherapy represented a better overall survival benefit and treatment efficiency and higher incidence of some grade 3–4 adverse events than the traditional chemotherapy for patients with unresectable advanced or recurrence gastric cancer. The anti vascular endothelial growth factor receptor drugs can improve the efficacy in the whole patients with unresectable advanced or recurrence gastric cancer and the anti epidermal growth factor receptor target drugs can only improve the efficacy in the epidermal growth factor receptor positive patients.

BackgroundGlasgow prognostic score (GPS) is widely known as a systemic inflammatory-based marker. The relationship between pretreatment GPS and gastric cancer (GC) survival and clinicopathological features remains controversial. The aim of the study was to conduct a meta-analysis of published studies to evaluate the association between pretreatment GPS and survival and clinicopathological features in GC patients.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and BioMed databases for relevant studies. Combined analyses were used to assess the association between pretreatment GPS and overall survival, disease-free survival, and clinicopathological parameters by Stata Version 12.0.ResultsA total of 14 studies were included in this meta-analysis, including 5,579 GC patients. The results indicated that pretreatment high GPS (HGPS) predicted poor overall survival (hazard ratio =1.51, 95% CI: 1.37–1.66, P<0.01) and disease-free survival (hazard ratio =1.45, 95% CI: 1.26–1.68, P<0.01) in GC patients. Pretreatment HGPS was also significantly associated with advanced tumor–node–metastasis stage (odds ratio [OR] =3.09, 95% CI: 2.11–4.53, P<0.01), lymph node metastasis (OR =4.60, 95% CI: 3.23–6.56, P<0.01), lymphatic invasion (OR =3.04, 95% CI: 2.00–4.62, P<0.01), and venous invasion (OR =3.56, 95% CI: 1.81–6.99, P<0.01).ConclusionOur meta-analysis indicated that pretreatment HGPS could be a predicative factor of poor survival outcome and clinicopathological features for GC patients.