ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2023
Combined Use of Tumor Markers in Gastric Cancer: A Novel Method with Promising Prognostic Accuracy and Practicality.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integration of objective nutritional status and tumor burden predicts 5-year survival after gastric cancer surgery: a multicenter real-world study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Associations of Multiple Serum Tumor Markers with Radiological Response and Overall Survival in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer Receiving First-Line Palliative Systemic Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Can combined biochemical and radiological responses enhance prognostic assessment after neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer? A multicenter real-world study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Correlation of immune-inflammatory and tumor markers with lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Dynamic variation in a combined inflammation-tumor marker index during neoadjuvant chemotherapy and its value for organ-preservation decisions in gastric cancer.Open life sciences · 2026Article
- Failure to Achieve 70% of Recommended Protein Intake at One Year Predicts 13-Fold Higher Mortality After Gastrectomy.Nutrients · 2025Observational
- Unsupervised machine learning reveals prognostic value of dynamic carbohydrate antigen 125 trajectory in gastric cancer.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Clinical characteristics and transabdominal ultrasound features that associated with T3-T4 staging in gastric cancer: A retrospective study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Analysis and Exploration of the Relationship Between the Status of Serum Tumor Markers and Clinicopathological Features and Curative Effects in Gastric Cancer and Gastroesophageal Junction Tumor.OncoTargets and therapy · 2025Article
- LncRNAs in serum-derived extracellular vesicles are potential biomarker and correlated with immune infiltration in gastric cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Post-gastrectomy anemia and ferritin dynamics: key determinants of prognosis and clinical management in patients with gastric cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- CA199 and CEA expression levels, and minimally invasive postoperative prognosis analysis in esophageal squamous carcinoma patients.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2025Article
- Impact of dynamic changes of tumor marker in neoadjuvant chemotherapy-treated triple-negative gastric cancer patients: a multi-center study.BMC cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe effect of a single tumor marker on the prognosis of gastric cancer patients is not ideal. This study explored a novel prognostic assessment method for gastric cancer (GC) patients using a combination of three important tumor markers (CEA, CA72-4, and CA19-9).
methodData from 1966 GC patients who underwent curative gastrectomy at Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center (Guangzhou, China) were included. Hazard ratios (HR) for all factors for overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Cox regression. A nomogram and calibration curve were used to establish the survival prediction model. The prediction accuracy was evaluated with the concordance index (C-index).
resultsAll patients were divided into four groups (C0-C3) according to the number of elevated tumor markers. The 5-year OS rates of the patients in preoperative groups C0-C3 were 83.8% (81.3-86.4%), 72.8% (68.5-77.4%), 58.9% (50.4-68.9%), and 18.5% (4.0-33.0%), respectively, and those in postoperative groups C0-C3 were 82.1% (79.4-84.8%), 76.1% (72.2-80.3%), 57.6% (48.4-68.5%), and 16.8% (5.1-28.5%), respectively, with significant differences between each C0-C3 subgroup in both preoperative and postoperative cohorts. Multivariate analysis showed that preoperative (HR: 6.001, 95% CI: 3.523-10.221) and postoperative (HR: 8.149, 95% CI: 4.962-13.528) elevated tumor markers were independent risk factors for GC patients. The C-index for the combined use of tumor markers was 0.65-0.66, which was higher than that for using a single tumor marker (0.53-0.56).
conclusionThe combined use of tumor markers significantly improved the prognostic value compared with using a single tumor marker. The survival prediction model including the combined tumor markers was accurate and effective.
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.