Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33566122›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of surgery2021

Short-Term Outcomes from a Randomized Screening Phase II Non-inferiority Trial Comparing Omentectomy and Omentum Preservation for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: the TOP-G Trial.

Hitoshi Murakami, Takanobu Yamada, Masataka Taguri, Shinichi Hasegawa, Takeharu Yamanaka, Yasushi Rino, Hiroyuki Mushiake, Takashi Oshima, Hiroshi Matsukawa, Kazuyuki Tani and 11 more

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pattern of lymph node metastases in gastric cancer: a side-study of the multicenter LOGICA-trial.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2022
    Trial
  8. Article
  9. Current debate in gastric cancer surgery: Omentectomy?World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Current clinical trials on gastric cancer surgery in China.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

21 authors.

Hitoshi MurakamiDepartment of Surgery, Kamishirane Hospital, Yokohama, Japan.
Takanobu YamadaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, 2-3-2 Nakao Asahi, Yokohama Kanagawa, Japan. takay0218@yahoo.co.jp.
Masataka TaguriDepartment of Data Science, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Shinichi HasegawaHasegawa Medical Clinic, Yokohama, Japan.
Takeharu YamanakaDepartment of Biostatistics, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Yasushi RinoDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Hiroyuki MushiakeDepartment of Surgery, Saiseikai Yokohama Nanbu Hospital, Yokohama, Japan.
Takashi OshimaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, 2-3-2 Nakao Asahi, Yokohama Kanagawa, Japan.
Hiroshi MatsukawaDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama Minami Kyosai Hospital, Yokohama, Japan.
Kazuyuki TaniDepartment of Surgery, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital, Hiratsuka, Japan.
Yoshihiro SuzukiDepartment of Surgery, Kanagawa Prefectural Ashigarakami Hospital, Matsuda, Japan.
Yukihiro OzawaDepartment of Surgery, Miura City Hospital, Miura, Japan.
Hiroyasu TanabeDepartment of Surgery, International University of Health and Welfare Atami Hospital, Atami, Japan.
Tomohiko OsaragiDepartment of Surgery, Japanese Red Cross Hadano Hospital, Hadano, Japan.
Tsutomu SatoDepartment of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan.
Hiroshi TamagawaDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Norio YukawaDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Takaki YoshikawaDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji Chuo-ku, Tokyo, Japan. tayoshik@ncc.go.jp.
Toshio ImadaDepartment of Surgery, Chigasaki Chuo Hospital, Chigasaki, Japan.
Munetaka MasudaDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Yuji YamamotoDepartment of Surgery, Fujisawa Shonandai Hospital, Fujisawa, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOmentectomy is considered an essential part of curative gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer (GC), albeit without solid evidence. We conducted a randomized phase II trial (the TOP-G trial) comparing omentectomy and omentum preservation for gastric cancer. This report describes the short-term findings regarding the trial's secondary endpoints.

methodsThe trial protocol was submitted to the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry ( http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/ : UMIN000005421). The key eligibility criteria were histologically confirmed cT2-4a and N0-2 gastric adenocarcinoma. Short-term surgical outcomes, including morbidity and mortality, were compared between the omentectomy group (group A, control arm) and the omentum-preserving surgery group (group B, test arm). All procedures were performed via an open approach. Based on a non-inferiority margin of 7%, statistical power of 0.7, and type I error of 0.2, the sample size was set to 250 patients.

resultsA total of 251 patients were eligible and randomized (group A: 125 patients, group B: 126 patients) between April 2011 and October 2018. After excluding patients who had peritoneal metastasis or laparotomy history, safety outcomes were analyzed for 247 patients. Group A had a significantly longer median operation time (225 min vs. 204 min, p = 0.022) and tended to have greater median blood loss (260 mL vs. 210 mL p = 0.073). The incidences of morbidity were similar and < 10% in both groups (8% vs. 9%, p = 1.000). There was no mortality in either group.

conclusionsOperative risk was generally similar between omentectomy and omentum-preserving surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaStomach NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerGastrectomyHumansOmentum

Identifiers

PMID33566122

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.