Cited by 91

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Micrometastases: marker of metastatic potential or evidence of residual disease?

O'Sullivan, G C, Collins, J K, Kelly, J, Morgan, J, Madden, M, Shanahan, F·1997·Gut

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Micrometastases within bone marrow have been shown to indicate a poor prognosis in patients with epithelial tumours. However, the degree to which micrometastases represent true residual disease or cell shedding and metastatic potential, is unclear. AIM: To explore whether micrometastases represent residual disease, bone marrow taken from carefully staged patients before and after (> 6 months) "curative" resection of a primary gastrointestinal cancer was studied prospectively. PATIENTS/METHODS: Seventy two consecutive patients were studied; the only exclusions were patients with known overt metastatic disease at the time of surgery. Micrometastatic cells were quantified per 10(5) marrow cells by flow cytometry after staining for contaminant cytokeratin-18 positive cells. RESULTS: Micrometastases were detected preoperatively in 22% (16/72) of all patients, comprising 11 (23%) of 48 with colorectal cancer, five (33%) of 15 with gastric adenocarcinoma and none (0%) of nine with oesophageal squamous cancer. Although fewer metastatic cells were detected in postoperative bone marrow, and clearance of marrow deposits was evident in most patients, the persistence of micrometastases in five of 16 patients after resection, without evidence of tumour recurrence, indicates a subset with true residual disease. Detection of micrometastases postoperatively (persistent or newly developed) was significantly associated with development of overt metastases during the subsequent 12-18 months of follow up (nine of 19 patients) when compared with patients testing negative for micrometastases (eight of 53; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative detection of micrometastases may reflect either transient shedding of cells, metastatic potential or residual disease, but postoperative micrometastases indicate minimal residual disease. Identification of these patients is important because they may benefit from adjuvant therapy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/gut.40.4.512

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. Mansi J., Berger U, Easton D, McDonnell T, Redding WH, Gazet JC, et al. Micrometastases in bone marrow in patients with primary breast cancer: evaluation as an early predictor of bone metastases. BMJ 1987; 295: 1093-6.
  2. Cote RJ, Rosen PP, Lesser ML, Old LJ, Osborne MP. Prediction of early relapse in patients with operable breast cancer by detection of occult bone marrow micro- metastases. JClin Oncol 1991; 9: 1749-56.
  3. CoteRJ,BeattieEJ,ChaiwunB, ShiS-R,HarveyJ, Chen S-C, et al. Detection of occult bone marrow micrometastases in patients with operable lung carcinoma. Ann Surg 1995; 222: 415-25.
  4. Pantel K, IzbickiJ, Passlick B, Angstwurm M, Haussinger K, Thetter 0, et al. Frequency and prognostic significance of isolated turmour cells in bone marrow of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer without overt metastases. Lancet 1996; 347: 649-53.
  5. Lindemann F, Schlimok G, Dirschedl P, Witte J, Riethmuller G. Prognostic significance ofmicrometastatic tumour cells in bone marrow of colorectal cancer patients. Lancet 1992; 340: 685-9.
  6. O'SullivanGC, CollinsJK, O'BrienF, Crowley B, MurphyK, Lee G, Shanahan F. Micrometastases in bone marrow of patients undergoing "curative" surgery for gastro- intestinal cancer. Gastroenterology 1995; 109: 1535-40.
  7. Nossal GJV. Minimal residual disease as the target for immunotherapy of cancer. Lancet 1994; 343: 1172-4.
  8. Sinicrope FA, Sugarman SM. Role of adjuvant therapy in surgically resected colorectal carcinoma. Gastroenterology 1995; 109: 984-93.
  9. Folkman J. Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular, rheumatoid and other disease. Nat Med 1995; 1: 27-31.
  10. Boyum A. Separation of leukocytes from blood and bone marrrow. ScandJ Clin Lab Invest 1968; 21: 31-50.
  11. Cordell JL, Falini B, Erber WN, Gosh AK, Abdulaziz Z, MacDonald S, et al. Immunoenzymatic labelling of monoclonal antibodies using immune complexes of alkaline phosphatase and monoclonal antialkaline phos- phatase (APAAP complexes). J Histochem Cytochem 1984; 32: 219-29.
  12. Schlimok G, Riethmiiller G. Detection, characterization and tumorigenicity of disseminated tumor cells in human bone marrow. Semin Cancer Biol 1990; 1: 207-15.
  13. Brugger W, Bross KJ, Glatt M, Weber F, Mertelsmann R, Kanz L. Mobilisation of tumor cells and hemapoietic progenitor cells into peripheral blood of patients with solid tumors. Blood 1994; 83: 636-40.
  14. Shpall EJ, Jones RB. Release of tumor cells from bone marrow. Blood 1994; 83: 623-5.
  15. Eschwege P, Dumas F, Blanchet P, Le Marie V, Benoit G, Jardin A, et al. Haematogenous dissemination of prostatic epithelial cells during radical prostatectomy. Lancet 1995; 346: 1528-30.
  16. Rubio CA, Emas S, Nylander G. A critical reappraisal of Dukes' classification. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1977; 145: 682-4. 515 on August 22, 2023 by guest. Protected by copyright. http://gut.bmj.com/ Gut: first published as 10.1136/gut.40.4.512 on 1 April 1997. Downloaded from

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
O'Sullivan, G. C., Collins, J. K., Kelly, J., Morgan, J., Madden, M., & Shanahan, F.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1997-04
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
512-515
ISSN
  • 0017-5749
  • 1468-3288
Cited by
91
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review