Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30112333›Full record

ArticleSouth Asian journal of cancer

Metastatic Gastric cancer: Real world scenario from a developing country.

Sandip Ganguly, Bivas Biswas, Joydeep Ghosh, Deepak Dabkara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in South Asian journal of cancer. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Sandip GangulyDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Bivas BiswasDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Joydeep GhoshDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Deepak DabkaraDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimData on epidemiology and outcome in metastatic stomach carcinoma patients from India are scarce. We aimed to evaluate clinical features and treatment outcome in patients treated at our center. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis is a single institutional review of metastatic gastric carcinoma patients treated between May 2011 and October 2016. Patients who received at least one cycle of chemotherapy were included for modified intent-to-treat survival analysis.

resultstotal of 143 patients were diagnosed with metastatic stomach carcinoma with a median age of 56 years (range: 29-86). The most common symptoms were abdominal pain in 112 (78%) patients. The most common site was body in 81 (57%) patients. Common site of metastasis was peritoneum in 86 (60%) and liver in (62%). Seventy-one (50%) patients were eligible for survival analysis. Common chemotherapy regimens were capecitabine-cisplatin in 27 (38%) and EOX in 22 (31%) patients. Survival status could not be assessed in 29 (41%) patients who lost to follow-up. After a median follow-up 9.7 months (range: 0.5-37.7), median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months (range: 0.5-23.9) and median overall survival (OS) was 12.2 months (range: 0.5-37.7). The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) ≥2 and the presence of linitis plastica showed a trend toward inferior PFS (

conclusionsPlatinum-based doublet chemotherapy was used in the majority of patients. The overall outcome was comparable to that of the available literature. Female sex and ECOG PS ≥2 predicted the inferior outcome.

Indexed as

Chemotherapygastric cancermetastases

Identifiers

PMID30112333
PMCPMC6069341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.