ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2010
Predictive power of serum pepsinogen tests for the development of gastric cancer in comparison to the histologic risk index.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Management of precancerous conditions and lesions in the stomach (MAPS): guideline from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), European Helicobacter Study Group (EHSG), European Society of Pathology (ESP), and the Sociedade Portuguesa de Endoscopia Digestiva (SPED).Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2012Guideline
- Guideline
- Serum gastrin-17 concentration for prediction of upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding risk among peptic ulcer patients.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Article
- Prediction of Chronic Atrophic Gastritis and Gastric Neoplasms by Serum Pepsinogen Assay: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
- Serological assessment of gastric mucosal atrophy in gastric cancer.BMC gastroenterology · 2012Article
- Serum pepsinogens in gastric cancer screening.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimThe selection of a high-risk group of gastric cancer is important. This study was performed to compare the efficacy of non-invasive gastric cancer screening through the measurement of pepsinogen (PG) I/II ratio and endoscopic screening using histologic criteria (Meining's risk index for gastric cancer) in Korean patients.
methodsIncluded in the study were 460 gastric cancer patients and 460 control cases who underwent upper endoscopy between June 2003 and July 2008 at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Serum PG I/II ratio and histologic characteristics were evaluated for each participant. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to compare the predictive power for gastric cancer of both the PG II/I ratio (the inverse form of PG I/II ratio) and the histologic gastric cancer risk index.
resultsA higher PG II/I ratio was significantly associated with a higher risk for gastric cancer (odds ratio of highest quartile for cancer vs. lowest quartile, 3.51; 95% confidence interval, 2.29-5.36) in the multivariate logistic model. The validity (in terms of calibration and discrimination) of the PG-including multivariate logistic model was comparable to the histologic gastric cancer risk index model. The results were similar regardless of the staging of the cancer, Lauren's histologic classification, and the location of the cancer.
conclusionsThese results suggest that non-invasive measurement of serum PG I/II ratio is as effective as Meining's histologic gastric cancer risk index in predicting gastric cancer occurrence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20306133What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.