ArticleMedicine2017
The serum pepsinogen levels for risk assessment of gastric neoplasms: New proposal from a case-control study in Korea.
Article in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- AGA Clinical Practice Guidelines on Management of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia.Gastroenterology · 2020Guideline
- From screening to surveillance: integrated prevention ofThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2026Review
- Tegoprazan-Amoxicillin Dual Therapy for Clarithromycin-ResistantMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Determining Gastric Cancer-Related Risk Factors in Mongolian Population Using ABC(D) Method: A Matched Case-Control Study.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Article
- StandardWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Clinical Value of Combined Detection of Serum sTim-3 and Pepsinogen for Gastric Cancer Diagnosis.Cancer management and research · 2021Article
- Serum pepsinogens as a gastric cancer and gastritis biomarker in South and Southeast Asian populations.PloS one · 2020Article
- 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
- The Value of Pepsinogen in GC Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To decrease the gastric cancer related mortality rate, endoscopic screening is widely performed in Korea. However, a precise method for identifying those at a high risk of gastric neoplasms has not been established. This study aims to evaluate serum pepsinogen (PG) levels for risk assessment of gastric neoplasms. Between August 2014 and March 2016, a total of 398 subjects, including 87 with gastric neoplasms, were enrolled in this study. On the basis of the serum PG I/II ratio, the enrolled subjects were classified into 4 groups: group A, PG I/II ratio >4; group B, >3 and ≤4; group C, >2 and ≤3; group D, ≤2. Compared with group A, a stepwise increase in the risk of gastric neoplasm was observed from group B [odds ratio (OR) = 9.9, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 4.0-24.4] to group C (OR = 20.9, 95% CI = 8.7-50.5) to group D (OR = 37.3, 95% CI = 14.3-97.4). The optimal cutoff value of the serum PG I/II ratio for predicting gastric neoplasms was 4.5, with a sensitivity of 97.7% and a specificity of 57.6%. A decrease in the serum PG I/II ratio was strongly associated with an increased risk of gastric neoplasms. The serum PG I/II ratio can be used to identify those at a high risk of gastric neoplasms in Korean population.
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.