ArticleGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2015
Comparative study of Western and Japanese criteria for biopsy-based diagnosis of gastric epithelial neoplasia.
Article in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2015. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The incidence of nonampullary duodenal cancer in Japan 2016-2020: analysis of a national cancer registry.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Article
- Tissue classification and diagnosis of colorectal cancer histopathology images using deep learning algorithms. Is the time ripe for clinical practice implementation?Przeglad gastroenterologiczny · 2023Review
- Natural History of Early Gastric Cancer: a Case Report and Literature Review.Journal of gastric cancer · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Western countries, gastric cancer (GC) is diagnosed when there is histological evidence of invasion into the lamina propria or beyond the submucosa. In Japan and some other countries, however, diagnosis of GC is based on the degree of structural and cytological abnormality of tumor glands. The aim of the present study was to compare the accuracy of the Western and Japanese criteria for diagnosis of GC.
methodsThe study included 233 consecutive patients with a postoperative diagnosis of submucosal invasive GC who underwent gastrectomy or endoscopic submucosal dissection. All pretreatment biopsy specimens were independently reviewed by two experts in gastrointestinal pathology employing both the Western and Japanese diagnostic criteria. Diagnostic agreement between pretreatment biopsy specimens and the corresponding resected specimens was evaluated, together with the interobserver agreement for each of the criteria.
resultsOn the basis of the Western and Japanese criteria, the pretreatment biopsy diagnosis was noncancerous (including dysplasia) in 44 lesions and 1 lesion, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy based on biopsy was 81.1% for the Western criteria and 99.5% for the Japanese criteria (P < 0.001). Interobserver agreement based on the Western and Japanese criteria was 73.8% and 96.5%, respectively (P < 0.001). Invasion into the submucosa was detected by biopsy in only 25 cases.
conclusionsThe Japanese criteria are significantly more accurate for pretreatment biopsy diagnosis of GC. The Western criteria could lead to underdiagnosis of a lesion as high-grade dysplasia, even if submucosal invasive cancer is present.
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.