ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2021
Prognostic factors for cytology-positive gastric cancer: a multicenter retrospective analysis.
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-Term Outcomes of Patients with Gastric Cancer and Positive Peritoneal Cytology.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Consensus Guideline for the Management of Gastric Cancer with Synchronous Peritoneal Metastases.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- Prognostic factors and efficacy of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer with positive peritoneal cytology after gastrectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Review
- hsa_circ_0060975 is highly expressed and predicts a poor prognosis in gastric cancer.Oncology letters · 2021Article
- Prognostic and Predictive Factors for Patients With Gastric Cancer who Are Positive for Peritoneal Lavage Cytology and Negative for Other Distant Metastasis.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prognosis of patients with gastric cancer and positive peritoneal lavage cytology is poor, even after gastrectomy. Though the standard therapy for this population is radical gastrectomy followed by S-1 chemotherapy, treatments vary among institutions and eras. We conducted a multicenter retrospective study to investigate the prognostic factors for cytology-positive gastric cancer.
methodsWe reviewed the medical records obtained from 6 institutions, covering 2000-2019. There were 128 patients with positive cytology and no other distant metastases that underwent R1 gastrectomy. Univariate and multivariate analyses to identify prognostic factors for overall survival were conducted using Cox's proportional hazards models.
resultsThe median overall survival time was 18.6 months. In univariate analyses, age (≥ 80 years vs. < 70 years), performance status (2, 3 vs. 0), prognostic nutritional index (< 35 vs. ≥ 40), the extent of lymphadenectomy (D1 vs. ≥ D2), macroscopic type (type 4 vs. non-type 4), and postoperative chemotherapy (none vs. S-1) were significantly correlated with worse survival. Multivariate analysis revealed that lymph node metastasis (pN3b vs. pN0, hazard ratio 4.46, 95% confidence interval 1.17-16.9, p = 0.03) and postoperative chemotherapy (none vs. S-1, hazard ratio 2.28, 95% confidence interval 1.16-4.45, p = 0.02) were independent risk factors for death. No postoperative chemotherapy regimen showed a survival benefit over S-1 monotherapy.
conclusionsMassive lymph node metastasis was an independent risk factor in cytology-positive gastric cancer. Postoperative chemotherapy was also an independent prognostic factor, though the most beneficial regimen was still uncertain.
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.