Introduction
Gastric cancer (GC) is the fourth most common malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide (1). Following surgery or late during the clinical course, GC frequently spreads to the regional lymph nodes, liver, peritoneum and lungs (2), but rarely disseminates to the bones. Thus, the incidence of bone metastasis (BM) from GC is only 0.9-10.5% (3-7), although the reported frequency of BM in GC patients is 13.4% in autopsy series and increases up to 45.3% in BM screening studies (8,9). Therefore, the incidence of asymptomatic BM may be underestimated, and the rate of BM in clinical cases may be markedly higher compared with the reported incidence.
The bone is a frequent metastatic site of breast, prostate and lung cancers, and the presence of BM typically indicates a poor prognosis (10-12). The incidence and prevalence of BM have increased proportionally with the aging population. Skeletal-related events (SREs), including pathological fractures, spinal cord compression and hypercalcemia, are the result of BM, may cause reduced physical function and quality of life (QoL), and require treatment with radiotherapy or surgery (13). A multidisciplinary approach using modalities such as radiotherapy, surgery and various medical treatments, including chemotherapy, hormone therapy and bone-modifying agents (BMA), is therefore warranted for patients with BM (10).
The presence of BM in metastatic GC has been reported as an independent poor prognostic factor, and GC patients with BMs exhibited the poorest median survival time compared with patients with metastases to other sites, including the chest, liver, or abdomen (14). However, to date, there have been only few studies examining the clinical presentation and prognosis of BM from GC.
The aim of the present study was to retrospectively investigate the clinicopathological characteristics, treatment outcomes, prognostic factors and SREs in GC patients with BM who underwent treatment at our institution.
Discussion
BM results in disruption of the normal bone homeostasis, which is a dynamic process involving osteoclast-mediated osteolysis and osteoblast-mediated osteogenesis. This frequently decreases bone integrity and causes severe bone pain, an increased risk of fracture, and the release of minerals from the bone matrix, resulting in hypercalcemia (13,15). Complications associated with BM include SREs, such as radiotherapy or surgery of the bone, pathological fractures, spinal cord compression and hypercalcemia, which result in morbidity, deterioration of the QoL and poor prognosis. Therefore, early diagnosis and appropriate treatment of BM are crucial for preventing the development of SREs and improving patient survival.
Early detection of BM relies on its clinical characteristics. There were clinical symptoms in 56.7% of the patients at diagnosis of BM. CT scan is the most commonly used imaging technique for the surveillance of GC patients. Although MRI was not routinely used for patient follow-up monitoring, MRI was the technique mostly used for diagnosing BM in the present study. Our study demonstrated that skeletal metastatic lesions arising from GC were frequently found at multiple locations (83.3%), were metachronous (68.3%), coexisted with visceral or brain metastasis (61.7%), were of the osteolytic type (40%), and occurred most commonly in the spine (81.7%) and pelvis (61.7%). Moreover, the serum ALP level, known to be the most predictive biological marker for the presence of BM in GC (9,16), was elevated in 63.3% of the patients in the present study. In general, liver metastasis, in addition to BM, may be associated with elevated levels of ALP. However, although γ-glutamyl transpeptidase (γ-GTP) activity correlates with cholestatic liver disease, γ-GTP activity is not usually increased in BM. In the present study, γ-GTP levels were not increased in 18 of the 21 (85.7%) patients with high serum levels of ALP who did not have liver metastasis (data not shown). Therefore, it is suggested that, in patients diagnosed with GC, if the ALP value is atypically elevated, measurement of γ-GTP should be included in the evaluation of BM. Even if GC patients are asymptomatic, elevated serum levels of ALP and tumor markers, such as CEA and CA19-9, indicate BM and evaluation of BM is required. In the present study, 43.3% of the patients were asymptomatic at diagnosis of BM, and either bone scintigraphy or FDG-PET/CT was performed in such patients. However, as the serum ALP level is not always elevated when BM is present, using appropriate modalities, such as CT, MRI, bone scintigraphy and FDG-PET/CT, may also be necessary in routine practice, even in asymptomatic patients, in order to detect BM at an early stage.
Patients with metastatic GC with good ECOG PS scores and organ function should be offered systemic chemotherapy for palliation in order to improve survival. The most frequently used standard first-line chemotherapy regimen for metastatic GC is a combination of a fluoropyrimidine with platinum, although triple regimens including docetaxel may be useful in otherwise healthy patients with a high tumor burden (17,18). In patients with good ECOG PS score and organ function, second-line treatment with agents not used in the first-line treatments, such as taxanes and irinotecan, may confer a modest survival benefit (19,20). By contrast, chemotherapy is rarely administered to patients with poor ECOG PS. Previous studies have reported poor prognosis of BM from GC, with a median OS of 2-7 months after BM diagnosis (3-7,14,21). However, the median OS period after BM diagnosis in the present study was 9 months, indicating that the prognosis of GC patients with BM in our study population was better compared with that previously reported in the literature. BM in GC is often associated with a rapidly deteriorating clinical course and extremely poor prognosis, due to combined bone marrow metastasis causing hematological abnormalities, such as disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC). In the present study, 3.3% patients who had DIC at diagnosis of BM succumbed to the disease within 2 months after the diagnosis of BM and 21.7% of the patients developed DIC during the clinical course (data not shown). Poor ECOG PS score was one of the worst prognostic factors for OS on multivariate analyses. Moreover, significantly poor OS was also found on multivariate analyses in GC patients receiving chemotherapy prior to BM diagnosis and without palliative chemotherapy after BM occurrence. These data suggest that further treatment options may be available for GC patients who have not received chemotherapy compared with those with intensive chemotherapy prior to BM diagnosis; furthermore, even if BM has been diagnosed, regardless of the presence of visceral or brain metastasis, palliative chemotherapy after BM diagnosis should be considered whenever possible.
Currently, palliative radiotherapy for BM associated with pain symptoms is a well-established treatment. Previous studies have reported that BM causes high rates of SREs in patients with GC and radiotherapy is the most common SRE (3-6). Concordantly, our data also revealed that SREs occurred in 76.7% of our patients, and that radiotherapy for BM was performed in the majority (73.3%) of those patients. In the present study, the median survival after SRE occurrence was only 5 months, possibly due to aggressive SREs affecting survival, or other complications associated with SREs. Approximately 50% of patients who experienced SREs were found to have had these SREs at BM diagnosis, which was a significant prognostic factor for poor OS on univariate analysis. The data of the present study demonstrated that, among patients who did not present with SREs at BM diagnosis, 91.9% had ECOG PS scores 0-2 and were considered as candidates for palliative chemotherapy after BM diagnosis. These data suggest that early detection of BM before the occurrence of SRE improves patient survival.
It has been established that BMA, such as zoledronic acid and denosumab, are beneficial for the treatment and prevention of skeletal complications in patients with multiple myeloma and breast and prostate cancers (22-24). However, prospective data on the efficacy of BM in GC are lacking in the literature. In the present study, although this treatment modality did not significantly prolong OS, it was associated with a significant extension of SRS. Therefore, our data support the beneficial effects of BMA for BM that occurs from GC. At present, preventive dental care to decrease the risk of developing medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw is usually offered before administering BMAs in our institution, and BMAs are generally well tolerated. Even if asymptomatic, the initiation of BMA treatment upon diagnosis of BM is recommended to delay time to SREs and reduce skeletal morbidity in GC patients with BM.
There were certain limitations to the present study. This retrospective study was performed without randomization of patient selection. The number of patients was insufficient to draw a definitive conclusion. The majority of BM cases were not confirmed pathologically. The standardized methods used for detecting BMs were heterogenous, with each methodology having its own limit of detection. We were unable to obtain tumor stage data or laboratory test data in some of the cases. The present study did not quantify and compare the therapeutic effects of chemotherapy due to the wide range of chemotherapy regimens utilized. Finally, the usage of BMAs depended on the discretion of the attending physician.
In conclusion, poor ECOG PS score often prevents patients from receiving further available treatment. Therefore, early detection of BM and optimal treatment with BMA is imperative for preventing or delaying SREs, leading to maintenance of a more favorable ECOG PS score and continuation of chemotherapy in patients with GC.