Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15688098›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of colorectal disease2005

Carcinoma of the cardia: classification as esophageal or gastric cancer?

Burkhard H A von Rahden, Marcus Feith, Hubert J Stein

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of colorectal disease, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Burkhard H A von RahdenChirurgische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaningerstrasse 22, 81675 Munich, Germany.
Marcus Feith
Hubert J Stein

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe cardia is the anatomical borderland between the esophagus and stomach. Carcinomas of the cardia are regarded to share features of both, esophageal and gastric cancers. Controversy exists concerning their appropriate classification and whether these tumors comprise--in respect to tumor biology, pathophysiology as well as clinical features--an entirely separate entity. CLASSIFICATION: In order to distinguish cardia carcinomas from other adenocarcinomas arising within the vicinity of the esophagogastric junction, a classification system has been introduced from a surgical viewpoint, and is now well established and increasingly used worldwide. According to the topography of the main tumor mass, cardia carcinomas (AEG II) are distinguished from adenocarcinomas of the distal esophagus (AEG I) and subcardiac gastric cancers (AEG III). The tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system by the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) does not provide a separate classification for tumors of the esophagogastric junction. The use of the classification for esophageal or for gastric cancers is recommended, irrespective of the elementary differences in the classification of lymphatic spread implemented herein. DISCUSSION: New aspects concerning this controversial debate are discussed based on current insights into the pathogenesis and the cellular origin of these entities. The controversies concerning the classification of cardia carcinomas and the failure of the current esophageal and gastric cancer staging systems to reflect the peculiarities of this entity accurately, present a strong argument in favor of a new classification system.

Indexed as

CardiaAdenocarcinomaEsophageal NeoplasmsHumansNeoplasm StagingStomach Neoplasms

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.