Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35117635›Full record

ArticleTranslational cancer research2020

Clinical outcomes of proximal gastrectomy versus total gastrectomy for locally advanced proximal gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.

Lulu Zhao, Rui Ling, Fuhai Ma, Hu Ren, Hong Zhou, Tongbo Wang, Yingtai Chen, Shangying Hu, Dongbing Zhao

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Translational cancer research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Outcomes of Proximal Versus Total Gastrectomy for Proximal Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of a Western Center Experience.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023
    Article
  10. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lulu Zhao *National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Rui Ling *Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Fuhai MaNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Hu RenNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Hong ZhouNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Tongbo WangNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Yingtai ChenNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Shangying HuNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Dongbing ZhaoNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNGeorgetown University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe safety and efficacy of proximal gastrectomy (PG) following for locally advanced proximal gastric cancer (LAPGC) were unclear, as oncologic outcomes of randomized trials are still pending. The aim of this study was to evaluate surgical results and long-term oncologic outcomes of PG versus total gastrectomy (TG) in treating locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC).

methodsA total of 2,918 LAPGC patients with PG or TG were identified from the China National Cancer Center Gastric Cancer Database (NCCGCDB) 1998-2018. Propensity score matching was employed to match patients with PG or TG in a 1:1 ratio. Surgery outcomes and overall survival (OS) rates were compared between PG and TG groups after the propensity-score match. Cox proportional hazards model was used to explore the risk factors for OS.

resultsOf 2,918 patients, 181 (6.20%) underwent TG, while 2,737 (93.80%) underwent PG. After propensity score matching, 150 matched pairs for PG and TG were selected. Compared with TG group, PG group had shorter operative time (181.8±49.8

conclusionsIn conclusion, the extent of resection for LAPGC patients did not influence the long-term survival outcomes. Moreover, future randomized clinical trials of quality of life following PG or TG are expected to assist surgeons in the choice of surgical approach and strategy for LAPGC patients.

Indexed as

Locally advanced proximal gastric cancer (LAPGC)proximal gastrectomy (PG)survivaltotal gastrectomy (TG)

Identifiers

PMID35117635
PMCPMC8799083
OpenAlexW3008364313

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.