Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34246249›Full record

ArticleBMC gastroenterology2021

Combination of tumor markers predicts progression and pathological response in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment.

Zining Liu, Yinkui Wang, Fei Shan, Xiangji Ying, Yan Zhang, Shuangxi Li, Yongning Jia, Rulin Miao, Kan Xue, Zhemin Li and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Predicting response to patients with gastric cancer via a dynamic-aware model with longitudinal liquid biopsy data.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

12 authors.

Zining Liu *Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Yinkui Wang *Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Fei ShanKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Xiangji YingKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Yan ZhangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Shuangxi LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Yongning JiaKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Rulin MiaoKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Kan XueKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Zhemin LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Ziyu LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China. ziyu_li@hsc.pku.edu.cn.
Jiafu JiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prognostic values of preoperative tumor markers (TMs) remain elusive in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment (NACT). This study aimed to assess and establish a novel scoring system incorporating carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), carbohydrate antigen 72-4 (CA72-4) to enhance prognostic accuracy for progression-free survival (PFS) and pathological response (pCR).

methodsPatients' data were retrospectively analyzed from December 2006 to December 2017 in our center. The cutoff value of TMs was determined using the time-dependent receiver operating test characteristics method. These three TMs were allocated 1 point each for the post neoadjuvant chemotherapy combination of tumor markers (post-NACT CTM) scores. The training group comprised 533 patients, responsible for full analysis, and the validation group comprised 137 patients based on the selection protocol.

resultsOf 533 enrolled patients, 138, 233, 117, and 45 patients scored 0, 1, 2, 3 respectively. The 3-year PFS rate Multivariate analysis revealed that post-NACT CTM score was an independent predictor of PFS (0 vs. 1, HR: 1.34, 95% CI: 0.92-1.96, P = 0.128; 0 vs. 2, HR: 2.03, 95% CI: 1.35-3.05, P = 0.001; 0 vs. 3, HR: 2.98, 95% CI: 1.83-4.86, P < 0.001). The time-dependent area under curve (AUC) revealed a consistent highest level for post-NACT CTM than other three single TMs. Lower post-NACT CTM score significantly correlated with higher pCR rate based on multivariate logistic regression (2/3 vs. 1, OR: 2.77, 95% CI: 0.90-8.53, P = 0.077; 2/3 vs. 0, OR: 4.33, 95% CI: 1.38-13.61, P = 0.012). A nomogram was formed with both internal and external validation.

conclusionsThe post-NACT CTM score system served as a strong independent predictor for PFS and pCR in LAGC patients who received NACT. Further population-based studies are required to confirm our results.

Indexed as

Neoadjuvant TherapyStomach NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorHumansPrognosisRetrospective StudiesBiomarkers, TumorGastric cancerNeoadjuvant chemotherapySurvivalTime-dependent ROCTumor marker

Identifiers

PMID34246249
PMCPMC8272383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.