Observational studyGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2019
Comparison between gastric and esophageal classification system among adenocarcinomas of esophagogastric junction according to AJCC 8th edition: a retrospective observational study from two high-volume institutions in China.
Observational study in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- A nomogram model based on the number of examined lymph nodes-related signature to predict prognosis and guide clinical therapy in gastric cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- The expression signature, prognostic significance and immune cell infiltration of the OAS gene family in gastric cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- HLA-I genotype landscape in lung cancer and its prognosis value in Chinese small cell lung cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Subclassification scheme for adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction and prognostic analysis based on clinicopathological features.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Integrative analysis of gut microbiome and host transcriptome reveal novel molecular signatures in Hashimoto's thyroiditis.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Article
- Prognostic signature and immune landscape of 5-methylcytosine-related long non-coding RNAs in gastric cancer.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram for Siewert II esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: a retrospective analysis.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2024Article
- Novel Staging Schemes for Siewert Type II Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma: A Real-World Data Cohort Study from SEER Database.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023Article
- Neural network-based prognostic predictive tool for gastric cardiac cancer: the worldwide retrospective study.BioData mining · 2023Article
- Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Patients with Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction: A Retrospective, Multicenter, Observational Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Observational
- Prognostic Significance of Esophagogastric Junction Invasion in Patients with Adenocarcinoma of the Cardia or Subcardia.Cancers · 2023Article
- Tumor size predicts worse prognosis in esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma.Updates in surgery · 2022Article
- Surgical and survival outcomes after laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for serosa-invasive Siewert type II/III esophagogastric junction carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Clinical significance of mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase kinases in hepatitis B virus -related hepatocellular carcinoma and underlying mechanism exploration.Bioengineered · 2022Article
- SIRGs score may be a predictor of prognosis and immunotherapy response for esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Survival Risk Prediction of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Based on BES-LSSVM.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- HN1L promotes invasion and metastasis of the esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma.Thoracic cancer · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe new 8th TNM system attributes AEG Siewert type II to esophageal classification system. However, the gastric and esophageal classification system which was more suitable for type II remains in disputation. This study aimed to illuminate the 8th TNM-EC or TNM-GC system which was more rational for type II, especially for patients underwent transhiatal approaches.
methodsWe collected the database of patients with AEG who underwent radical surgical resection from two high-volume institutions in China: West China Hospital (N = 773) and Xi Jing Hospital of Fourth Military University (N = 637). The cases were randomly matched into 705 training cohort and 705 validation cohort. All the cases were reclassified by the 8th edition of TNM-EC and TNM-GC. The distribution of patients in each stage, the hazard ratio of each stage, and the separation of the survival were compared. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazard model. Comparisons between the different staging systems for the prognostic prediction were performed with the rcorrp.cens package in Hmisc in R (version 3.4.4. http://www.R-project.org/ ). The validity of these two systems was evaluated by Akaike information criterion (AIC) and concordance index (C-index).
resultsBy univariate analysis, the HRs from stage IA/IB to stage IV/IVB were monotonously increased according to TNM-GC scheme in both cohorts (training 2.63, 3.91, 5.02, 8.64, 15.51 and 29.64; validation 1.54, 3.55, 4.91, 7.14, 11.67, 18.71 and 48.32) whereas only a fluctuating increased tendency was found when staged by TNM-EC. After the multivariate analysis, TNM-GC (P < 0.001), TNM-EC (P = 0.001) in training cohort and TNM-GC (P < 0.001) TNM-EC (P < 0.001) in the validation cohort were both independent prognostic factors. The C-index value for the TNM-GC scheme was larger than that of TNM-EC system in both training (0.721 vs. 0.690, P < 0.001) and validation (0.721 vs. 0.696, P < 0.001) cohorts. After stratification analysis for Siewert type II, the C-index for TNM-GC scheme was still larger than that of TNM-EC in both training (0.724 vs. 0.694, P = 0.005) and validation (0.723 vs. 0.699, P < 0.001) cohorts.
conclusionsThe 8th TNM-GC scheme is superior to TNM-EC in predicting the prognosis of AEG especially for type II among patients underwent transhiatal approaches.
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.