Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31793655›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of oncology2019

Differences in the prognosis of gastric cancer patients of different sexes and races and the molecular mechanisms involved.

Huafu Li, Chunming Wang, Zhewei Wei, Wei Chen, Zicong Guo, Yulong He, Changhua Zhang

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A model established using marital status and other factors from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database for early stage gastric cancer.Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Huafu LiDigestive Medicine Center, The Seventh Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‑Sen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518107, P.R. China.
Chunming WangDigestive Medicine Center, The Seventh Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‑Sen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518107, P.R. China.
Zhewei WeiDepartment of Gastrointestinopancreatic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‑Sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510080, P.R. China.
Wei ChenDepartment of Gastrointestinopancreatic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‑Sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510080, P.R. China.
Zicong GuoDigestive Medicine Center, The Seventh Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‑Sen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518107, P.R. China.
Yulong HeDigestive Medicine Center, The Seventh Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‑Sen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518107, P.R. China.
Changhua ZhangDigestive Medicine Center, The Seventh Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‑Sen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518107, P.R. China.
The Seventh Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University · CNSun Yat-sen University · CNThe First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To evaluate the prognostic and molecular mechanisms of sex and racial differences in gastric cancer, data from two large centers were used to retrospectively analyze the survival of gastric cancer patients with regard to sex and racial differences. In examining the molecular mechanism of sex in gastric cancer patients of different races, data from The Cancer Genome Atlas database were used to analyze differentially expressed genes (DEGs), and Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment and DNA methylation analyses were performed. Among White gastric cancer patients, it was found that the survival prognosis for females was better than that for males; conversely, among Chinese patients, males had a better prognosis. For African Americans, sex may have an impact on gastric cancer, but this relationship was unclear. The core DEGs between the different sexes included glycogenin 2 pseudogene 1, ribosomal protein S4 Y‑linked 1, taxilin‑γ and eukaryotic translation initiation factor 1A X‑linked among White patients, and GO enrichment analysis revealed that these genes act mainly through RNA binding and transcription pathways. Among Black patients, core DEGs included DnaJ heat shock protein family (Hsp40) member C5, histone deacetylase 10, neogenin 1 and SMG5 nonsense mediated mRNA decay factor, which are mainly related to pathways of cellular structural changes based on GO enrichment analysis. For Asian patients, core DEGs included zinc finger protein Y‑linked, thymosin β4 Y‑linked, zinc finger protein 787 and ubiquitously transcribed tetratricopeptide repeat containing, Y‑linked, participating in cell surface receptor‑associated signal transduction and G‑protein coupled receptor protein signaling pathways, according to GO. The expression of different core genes and differences in pathways are likely to be the main causes affecting the variation observed among gastric cancer patients of different races and sexes.

Indexed as

AgedBiomarkers, TumorChinaComputational BiologyDatabases, GeneticFemaleGene Expression ProfilingHumansMalePrognosisRace FactorsRetrospective StudiesSEER ProgramSex FactorsStomach NeoplasmsSurvival RateBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID31793655
PMCPMC6776187
OpenAlexW2976277286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.