ReviewTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology2017
Prognostic impact of nodal status and therapeutic implications.
Review in Translational gastroenterology and hepatology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- Comparison of the predictive value of pathological response at primary tumor and lymph node status after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2023Article
- Article
- The Role of the Lymph Node Ratio in Advanced Gastric Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.Cancers · 2019Article
- Unnecessity of lymph node regression evaluation for predicting gastric adenocarcinoma outcome after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2019Article
- Surgical strategies in true adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG II): thoracoabdominal or abdominal approach?Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2018Article
- Gastric cancer lymph node resection-the more the merrier?Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prognostic impact of lymph node (LN) metastases in gastric cancer is generally accepted. In primarily resected patients the pN-category and LN ratio are independent prognostic factors. Number of involved LNs, number of resected LNs, lymphangiosis and micrometastases also influence the prognosis significantly. To guarantee a proper D2 lymphadenectomy (LAD) at least 25 LNs according to the German S3 guidelines for the treatment of gastric cancer should be removed. Also in neoadjuvantly treated patients the ypN-category and LN ratio play an important prognostic role, despite the fact that UICC staging system was development based only on primarily resected patients. The role of response of LNs in neoadjuvantly treated patients is still unclear and needs further investigation. It seems to be less important than the response of the primary tumor. Limited data exists, suggesting that preoperative treatment might reduce the number of LNs involved and improve ypN-category. Due to further development in gastric cancer like laparoscopic resection and effective perioperative treatment in locally advanced tumor the role and the prognostic impact of LAD is again in the focus of discussion.
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.