Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 11, Issue 5, pp 506–511 | Cite as

Artificial Neural Network for Prediction of Lymph Node Metastases in Gastric Cancer: A Phase II Diagnostic Study

  • Elfriede H. Bollschweiler
  • Stefan P. Mönig
  • Karin Hensler
  • Stephan E. Baldus
  • Keiichi Maruyama
  • Arnulf H. Hölscher
Original Articles

Abstract

Background

Extension of lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer is controversial, and preoperative diagnosis of lymph node metastases (LNM) is difficult. Therefore, knowledge-based systems such as the Maruyama computer program (MCP) are being developed. MCP shows good prognostic value for the compartments; however, for different lymph node groups (LNG) there are a large number of false positives. The aim of this study was to evaluate artificial neural networks (ANN) for predicting LNM in patients with gastric cancer and to compare the predictive power with that of MCP.

Methods

A total of 135 consecutive patients who underwent D2 gastrectomy were included. We applied a single-layer perceptron to the data of 4302 patients from the National Cancer Center, Tokyo, and compared the results with those from the MCP.

Results

Prediction of N+ or N0 with ANN-1 (Borrmann classification, T category, and tumor size and location) had an accuracy of 79%. The predictive value for LNM in each of the LNG varied: ANN-1, 64% to 86%; MCP, 42% to 70%. We constructed another ANN by using the additional parameter of metastases in LNG 3 as an example of sentinel node. The accuracy of this ANN was 93%.

Conclusions

Using an ANN, LNM in each LNG can be accurately predicted. Additional knowledge about one lymph node improves the results.

Key Words

Artificial neural network Gastric cancer Lymph node metastases Sentinel lymph node Diagnostic study 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Bonenkamp JJ, Songun I, Hermans J, et al. Randomised comparison of morbidity after D1 and D2 dissection for gastric cancer in 996 Dutch patients. Lancet 1995;345:745–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cuschieri A, Fayers P, Fielding J, et al. Postoperative morbidity and mortality after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: preliminary results of the MRC randomised controlled surgical trial. Lancet 1996;347:995–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonenkamp JJ, Hermans J, Sasako M, van der Velde. Dutch Gastric Cancer Group: extended lymph-node dissection for gastric cancer. N Engl J Med 1999;340:908–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cuschieri A, Weeden S, Fielding J, et al. Patients survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: longterm results of MRC randomized surgical trial. Br J Cancer 1999;79:1522–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Perri F, Iuliano R, Valente G, et al. Minute and small gastric cancers in a Western population: a clinicopathologic study. Gastrointest Endosc 1995;41:475–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sasako M, Mc Culloch P, Kinoshita T, Maruyama K. New method to evaluate the therapeutic value of lymph node dissection for gastric cancer. Br J Surg 1995;82:346–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mönig S, Zirbes TK, Schröder W, et al. Staging of gastric carcinoma—correlation of lymph node size and metastatic infiltration. Am J Roentgenol 1999;173:365–7.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kampschöer GHM, Maruyama K, van de Velde CJH, Sasako M, Kinoshita T, Okabayashi K. Computer analysis in making preoperative decisions: a rational approach to lymph node dissection in gastric cancer patients. Br J Surg 1989;76:905–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bollschweiler E, Boettcher K, Hoelscher AH, et al. Preoperative assessment of lymph node metastases in patients with gastric cancer: evaluation of the Maruyama computer program. Br J Surg 1992;79:156–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guadagni S, de Manzoni G, Catarci M, et al. Evaluation of the Maruyama computer program for preoperative estimation of lymph node metastases from gastric cancer. World J Surg 2000;24:1550–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sargent DJ. Comparison of artificial neural networks with other statistical approaches—results from medical data sets. Cancer. 91;(8 Suppl). 2001:1636–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dvorchik I, Subotin M, Marsh W, McMichael J, Fung JJ. Performance of multilayer feedforward neural networks to predict liver transplantation outcome. Methods Inf Med 1996;35:12–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma. 2nd English edition. Gastric Cancer 1998;1:10–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Siewert JR, Hölscher AH, Becker K, Gössner W. Kardiakarzinom. Versuch einer therapeutisch relevanten Klassifikation. Chirurg 1987;58:25–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Droste K, Bollschweiler E, Waschulzik T, et al. Prediction of lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer patients with neural networks. Cancer Lett 1996;109:141–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rosenblatt F. The perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organisation in the brain. Psychol Rev 1958;65:386–408.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Borrmann R. Geschwulste des Magens. Henke FU, Lubarsch O, eds. Handbuch der Speziellen Pathologischen Anatomie und Histologie. BerlinSpringer Verlag, 1926.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sendler A, Dittler AJ, Feussner H, et al. Preoperative staging of gastric cancer as precondition for multimodal treatment. World J Surg 1995;19:501–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Siewert JR, Böttcher K, Roder JD, et al. Prognostic relevance of systematic lymph node dissection in gastric carcinoma. Br J Surg 1993;80:1015–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schröder W, Hölscher AH. Aktuelle Therapiestrategien beim Magenfrühkarzinom. Onkologe 2001;7:610–22.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    De Manzoni G, Verlato G, Guglielmi A, Laterza E, Genna M, Cordiano C. Prognostic significance of lymph node dissection in gastric cancer. Br J Surg 1996;83:1604–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Siewert JR, Böttcher K, Stein HJ, Roder JD. Relevant prognostic factors in gastric cancer: ten-year results of the German Gastric Cancer Study. Ann Surg 1998;288:449–61.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bollschweiler E, Mönig S, Hölscher AH. Lymphknotenmetastasierung—kann man sie vorhersagen?. Onkologe 2001;7:604–9.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Akahoshi K, Chijiwa Y, Hamada S, et al. Pretreatment staging of endoscopically early gastric cancer with a 15 MHz ultrasound catheter probe. Gastrointest Endosc 1998;48:470–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Davies J, Chalmers AG, Sue-Ling HM, et al. Spiral computed tomography and operative staging of gastric carcinoma: a comparison with histopathological staging. Gut 1997;41:314–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim AY, Han JK, Seong CK, Kim TK, Choi BI. MRI in staging advanced gastric cancer: is it useful compared with spiral CT?. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000;24:3389–94.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dayhoff JE, DeLeo JM. Artificial neural networks—opening the black box. Cancer 2001;91:1615–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bollschweiler E, Böttcher K, Hölscher AH, et al. Is the prognosis for Japanese and German patients with gastric cancer really different?. Cancer 1993;7:2918–25.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Maruyama K. The most important prognostic factors for gastric cancer patients: a study using univariate and multivariate analysis. Scand J Gastroenterol. 22;(Suppl 133), 1987: 3–68.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ichikura T, Morita D, Uchida T, et al. Sentinel node concept in gastric carcinoma. World J Surg 2002;26:318–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hiratsuka M, Miyashiro I, Ishikawa O, et al. Application of sentinel node biopsy to gastric cancer surgery. Surgery 2001;129:335–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sano T, Katai H, Sasako M, Maruyama K. Gastric lymphography and detection of sentinel nodes. Recent Results Cancer Res 2000;157:253–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kitagawa Y, Ohgami M, Fujii H, et al. Laparoscopic detection of sentinel lymph nodes in gastrointestinal cancer: a novel and minimally invasive approach. Ann Surg Oncol 2001;8:86S–89S.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Maruyama K, Sasako M, Kinoshita T, Sano T, Katai H. Can sentinel node biopsy indicate rational extent of lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer surgery?. Langenbecks Arch Surg 1999;384:149–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Aikou T, Higashi H, Natsugoe S, Hokita S, Baba M, Tako S. Can sentinel node navigation surgery reduce the extent of lymph node dissection in gastric cancer? Ann Surg Oncol. 2001; 8(9 Suppl): 90–3.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mönig SP, Baldus SE, Hennecken JK, et al. Expression of MMP-2 is associated with progression and lymph node metastasis of gastric carcinoma. Histopathology 2001;39:597–602.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Baldus SE, Schneider PM, Mönig SP, et al. p21 in gastric cancer: associations with histopathological subtypes. Lymphnodal metastasis, prognosis and p53 status. Scand J Gastroenterol 2001;36:975–98.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mönig SP, Eidt S, Zirbes TK, Stippel D, Baldus SE, Pichlmaier H. p53 expression in gastric cancer: clinicopathological correlation and prognostic significance. Dig Dis Sci 1997;42:2463–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Surgical Oncology, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elfriede H. Bollschweiler
    • 1
    • 4
  • Stefan P. Mönig
    • 1
  • Karin Hensler
    • 1
  • Stephan E. Baldus
    • 2
  • Keiichi Maruyama
    • 3
  • Arnulf H. Hölscher
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Visceral and Vascular SurgeryUniversity of CologneGermany
  2. 2.Institute of PathologyUniversity of CologneGermany
  3. 3.Department of Surgical OncologyUniversity of Health and Welfare, Sanno HospitalTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Klinik und Poliklinik für Visceral und Gefäβchirurgieder Universität zu KölnKölnGermany

Personalised recommendations