Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37282430›Full record

ReviewJournal of minimal access surgery

Multidisciplinary treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Zhiyuan Yu, Huaiyu Tu, Shuzhong Qiu, Xiaoyu Dong, Yonghui Zhang, Chao Ma, Peiyu Li

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 76% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. R1 Resection in Gastric Cancer: Marker of Tumor Biology Rather Than Surgical Failure.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  2. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Zhiyuan YuSchool of Medicine, Nankai University, Nankai District, Tianjin; Medical School of Chinese PLA; Department of General Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
Huaiyu TuMedical School of Chinese PLA; Department of General Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
Shuzhong QiuMedical School of Chinese PLA, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
Xiaoyu DongMedical School of Chinese PLA; Department of General Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
Yonghui ZhangMedical School of Chinese PLA; Department of General Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
Chao MaMedical School of Chinese PLA; Department of General Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
Peiyu LiSchool of Medicine, Nankai University, Nankai District, Tianjin; Medical School of Chinese PLA; Department of General Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
Chinese PLA General Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of multidisciplinary treatment for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) who underwent radical gastrectomy. Patients and Methods: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of surgery alone, adjuvant chemotherapy (CT), adjuvant radiotherapy (RT), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), neoadjuvant CT, neoadjuvant RT, neoadjuvant CRT, perioperative CT and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for LAGC were searched. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence and metastasis, long-term mortality, adverse events (grade ≥3), operative complications and R0 resection rate were used as outcome indicators for meta-analysis. Results: Forty-five RCTs with 10077 participants were finally analysed. Adjuvant CT had higher OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.74, 95% credible interval [CI] = 0.66-0.82) and DFS (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.60-0.74) than surgery-alone group. Perioperative CT (odds ratio [OR] = 2.56, 95% CI = 1.19-5.50) and adjuvant CT (OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.27-0.86) both had more recurrence and metastasis than HIPEC + adjuvant CT, while adjuvant CRT tended to have less recurrence and metastasis than adjuvant CT (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.29-2.42) and even adjuvant RT (OR = 1.83, 95% CI = 0.98-3.40). Moreover, the incidence of mortality in HIPEC + adjuvant CT was lower than that in adjuvant RT (OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.11-0.72), adjuvant CT (OR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.23-0.86) and perioperative CT (OR = 2.39, 95% CI = 1.05-5.41). Analysis of adverse events (grade ≥3) showed no statistically significant difference between any two adjuvant therapy groups. Conclusion: A combination of HIPEC with adjuvant CT seems to be the most effective adjuvant therapy, which contributes to reducing tumour recurrence, metastasis and mortality - without increasing surgical complications and adverse events related to toxicity. Compared with CT or RT alone, CRT can reduce recurrence, metastasis and mortality but increase adverse events. Moreover, neoadjuvant therapy can effectively improve the radical resection rate, but neoadjuvant CT tends to increase surgical complications.

Indexed as

Locally advanced gastric cancerlong-term mortalitymultidisciplinary therapynetwork meta-analysisrecurrence and metastasis

Identifiers

PMID37282430
PMCPMC10449051
OpenAlexW4376614230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.