ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2012
The evaluation of surgical treatment for gastric cancer patients with noncurative resection.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are Palliative Interventions Worth the Risk in Advanced Gastric Cancer? A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2018: an Evidence-based, Multi-disciplinary Approach.Journal of gastric cancer · 2019Review
- The Benefits of Resection for Gastric Carcinoma Patients with Non-curative Factors.Chonnam medical journal · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to analyze the results of treatment in a series of 233 gastric cancer patients who underwent a noncurative resection.
methodsWe performed a retrospective study of patients with noncurative treatment for advanced gastric cancer who were divided into three treatment groups: total gastrectomy (TG, n=150), distal gastrectomy (DG, n=44), and nonresection (NR, bypass procedure or chemotherapy only, n=39).
resultsIn multivariate analysis, surgical treatment (TG) and an absence of chemotherapy were significant independent prognostic factors for a poor survival. In the late period, the overall survival rate was significantly lower in the TG group than in the DG group (p=0.005) and was marginally lower than in the NR group (p=0.054). The resection group had a poorer compliance for chemotherapy than the NR group, and the TG group had a poorer compliance than the DG group (p<0.01). The morbidity rate was higher in the TG group than in the DG group (p<0.05).
conclusionsTG is considered to be inappropriate for the treatment of noncurative gastric cancer because of the poor prognosis, high morbidity rates, and poor compliance for chemotherapy associated with the procedure. However, noncurative DG was acceptable and postoperative chemotherapy should be used in selected patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.