Prevalence of claudin 18.2 in gastric cancer patients from India

Résumé fourni par la source

Objectives: There is no data from India regarding the prevalence of Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) in patients with gastric adenocarcinomas (GC). Material and Methods: Records of treatment-naive, histologically confirmed gastric cancer (GC) diagnosed between January 2018 and October 2023 were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database at the Tata Memorial Hospital (TMH), Mumbai, India. Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) estimation was conducted by the Ventana CLDN18 (43- 14A) RxDx Assay (Ventana Medical Systems, Inc./Roche Diagnostics) on the archival paraffin blocks. CLDN 18.2 expression was considered positive if moderate to strong expression was seen in at least 75% of the tumour cells. The study's primary endpoint was to determine the prevalence of CLDN18.2 positivity in GC, while secondary endpoints aimed to correlate clinicopathological variables and overall survival (OS) with CLDN18.2 expression. Results: Six hundred specimens were screened, with adequate blocks and treatment details being available for 300 patients. The median age of the patients was 51 years (range 23-83 years). Most patients were males (67%) and had poorly differentiated histology (64%). Curative resection was performed in 38 % of the patients. CLDN18.2 positivity was seen in 95 cases (31.7%). CLDN18.2 positivity was significantly correlated with signet ring histology (42.4% vs. 22.4 %; p <0.001), CPS ≤5 (38% vs. 17%; p = 0.013), and female gender (40% vs. 27%; p = 0.025). Median OS in the CLD18.2 positive population was 14.1 months (95%CI 8.9-19.3), as compared to 19.5 months (95%CI 14.4-24.6) in those who tested negative, though the difference did not reach statistical significance ( p = 0.361). Conclusion: Claudin 18.2 positivity is observed in ~32% of Indian patients with gastric cancers, showing a stronger correlation with signet ring histology, female sex, and lower CPS among these patients. Claudin 18.2-positive patients tended to have poorer survival compared to Claudin 18.2-negative patients, although this requires further evaluation.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.