Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30510359›Full record

ArticleChinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu2018

Validation of clinical significance of examined lymph node count for accurate prognostic evaluation of gastric cancer for the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system.

Jingyu Deng, Jinyuan Liu, Wei Wang, Zhe Sun, Zhenning Wang, Zhiwei Zhou, Huimian Xu, Han Liang

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Jingyu DengDepartment of Gastric Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Cancer for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China.
Jinyuan LiuDepartment of Gastric Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Cancer for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China.
Wei WangDepartment of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Zhe SunDepartment of Surgical Oncology, the First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
Zhenning WangDepartment of Surgical Oncology, the First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
Zhiwei ZhouDepartment of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Huimian XuDepartment of Surgical Oncology, the First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
Han LiangDepartment of Gastric Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Cancer for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo validate the necessity of increasing the examined lymph node (ELN) count for enhancing the accuracy of prognostic evaluation of gastric cancer (GC) patients after curative gastrectomy in multiple medical centers of China.

methodsThe clinicopathological data of 7,620 patients who underwent the curative resection for GC between 2001 and 2011 were included to demonstrate whether the ELN count is indispensable for enhancing the accuracy of prognostic evaluation of GC patients after surgery. After a meticulous stratification by using the cut-point survival analysis, all included 7,620 patients were allocated into three groups as: less than 16 (<16), between 16 and 30 (16-30), and more than 30 (>30) ELNs. Survival differences among various subgroups of GC patients were analyzed to assess the impact of the ELN count on the stage migration in accordance with the overall survival (OS) of GC patients.

resultsSurvival analyses revealed that the ELN count was positively correlated with the OS (P=0.001) and was an independent prognostic predictor (P<0.01) of 7,620 GC patients. Stratum analysis showed that the accuracy of prognostic evaluation could be enhanced when the ELN count was no less than 16 (≥16) for node-negative patients and >30 for node-positive patients. Stage migrations were mainly detected in the various subgroups of patients with specific pN stages as follows: pN0 with 16-30 ELNs (pN0

conclusionsThe ELN count should be proposed to be >30 for acquiring the accurate prognostic evaluation for GC patients, especially for node-positive patients.

Indexed as

lymph nodemetastasisneoplasmprognosisStomach

Identifiers

PMID30510359
PMCPMC6232365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.