Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25593472›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2015

Histological mixed-type as an independent prognostic factor in stage I gastric carcinoma.

Shuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Shuhei KomatsuShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Daisuke IchikawaShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Mahito MiyamaeShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Hiroki ShimizuShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Hirotaka KonishiShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Atsushi ShiozakiShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Hitoshi FujiwaraShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Kazuma OkamotoShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Mitsuo KishimotoShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Eigo OtsujiShuhei Komatsu, Daisuke Ichikawa, Mahito Miyamae, Hiroki Shimizu, Hirotaka Konishi, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Mitsuo Kishimoto, Eigo Otsuji, Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo evaluate the clinicopathological features of mixed-type gastric cancer and their influence on prognosis of mixed-type stage I gastric cancer.

methodsWe analyzed 446 patients who underwent curative gastrectomy for stage I gastric cancer between 1999 and 2009. The patients were divided into two groups: those with differentiated or undifferentiated cancer (non-mixed-type, n = 333) and those with a mixture of differentiated and undifferentiated cancers (mixed-type, n = 113).

resultsThe overall prevalence of mixed-type gastric cancer was 25.3% (113/446). Compared with patients with non-mixed-type gastric cancer, those with mixed-type gastric cancer tended to be older at onset (P = 0.1252) and have a higher incidence of lymph node metastasis (P = 0.1476). They also had significantly larger tumors (P < 0.0001), more aggressive lymphatic invasion (P = 0.0011), and deeper tumor invasion (P < 0.0001). In addition, they exhibited significantly worse overall survival rates than did patients with non-mixed-type gastric cancer (P = 0.0026). Furthermore, mixed-type gastric cancer was independently associated with a worse outcome in multivariate analysis [P = 0.0300, hazard ratio = 11.4 (1.265-102.7)].

conclusionHistological mixed-type of gastric cancer contributes to malignant outcomes and highlight its usefulness as a prognostic indicator in stage I gastric cancer.

Indexed as

Cell DifferentiationAgedChi-Square DistributionFemaleGastrectomyHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisNeoplasms, Complex and MixedNeoplasm StagingProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsStomach NeoplasmsEarly gastric cancerHistological typeMixed-type gastric cancerPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID25593472
PMCPMC4294166

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.