ArticleBMC cancer2017
Optimal interval of endoscopic screening based on stage distributions of detected gastric cancers.
Article in BMC cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A dual-gene panel of two fragments of methylated IRF4 and one of ZEB2 in plasma cell-free DNA for gastric cancer detection.Epigenetics · 2024Article
- Clinicopathological characteristics of advanced gastric cancer afterJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2022Article
- Gastric Xanthoma Is Related to the Rapid Growth of Gastric Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Impact of the Interval between Previous Endoscopic Exam and Diagnosis on the Mortality and Treatment Modality of Undifferentiated-Type Gastric Cancer.Journal of gastric cancer · 2021Article
- Improving Efficacy of Endoscopic Diagnosis of Early Gastric Cancer: Gaps to Overcome from the Real-World Practice in Vietnam.BioMed research international · 2020Article
- What Is Appropriate Upper Endoscopic Interval Among Dyspeptic Patients With Previously Normal Endoscopy? A Multicenter Study With Bayesian Change Point Analysis.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough Korea and Japan have a national gastric cancer screening program, their screening intervals are different. The optimal screening interval of endoscopic screening in Japan was investigated based on the stage distributions of screen-detected gastric cancers.
methodsPatients with gastric cancer detected by endoscopic and radiographic screenings were selected from the Niigata City Medical Association database. The stage distributions of the detected gastric cancers were compared among patients with different screening histories in both groups. Gastric cancer specific survival rates were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test.
resultsThere were 1585 and 462 subjects in the endoscopic and radiographic screening groups, respectively. In the endoscopic screening group, the stage IV proportion was lower in patients with screening history 1 and 2 years before diagnosis than in patients without screening history. Stage IV development was significantly related to the absence of screening history (p < 0.001); however, there were no differences between patients who had endoscopic screening history 2 and 3 years before diagnosis. The survival rates were not significantly different between patients with endoscopic screening 1 and 2 years previously (p = 0.7763). The survival rates were significantly higher in patients with endoscopic screening history 1 and 2 years before diagnosis than in patients without screening history (p < 0.001), and in patients with endoscopic screaming 3 years before diagnosis (P < 0.0069).
conclusionThe endoscopic screening interval for gastric cancer can be expanded to at least 2 years based on the stage distributions of detected cancers and the patient survival rates.
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.