Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39623302›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2024

Prognostic effect of immunohistochemically determined molecular subtypes in gastric cancer.

Jefim Brodkin, Tuomas Kaprio, Jaana Hagström, Alli Leppä, Arto Kokkola, Caj Haglund, Camilla Böckelman

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2024. 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. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  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

7 authors.

Jefim BrodkinTranslational Cancer Medicine Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, PO Box 340, Haartmaninkatu 4, Helsinki, HUS , FIN-00029, Finland. jefim.brodkin@helsinki.fi.
Tuomas KaprioTranslational Cancer Medicine Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, PO Box 340, Haartmaninkatu 4, Helsinki, HUS , FIN-00029, Finland.
Jaana HagströmTranslational Cancer Medicine Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, PO Box 340, Haartmaninkatu 4, Helsinki, HUS , FIN-00029, Finland.
Alli LeppäDepartment of Surgery, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Arto KokkolaDepartment of Surgery, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Caj HaglundTranslational Cancer Medicine Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, PO Box 340, Haartmaninkatu 4, Helsinki, HUS , FIN-00029, Finland.
Camilla BöckelmanTranslational Cancer Medicine Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, PO Box 340, Haartmaninkatu 4, Helsinki, HUS , FIN-00029, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cause of cancer-related death. Two molecular subtyping classifications were recently introduced: The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the Asian Cancer Research Group (ACRG) classifications.

methodsWe classified a cohort of 283 gastric cancer patients undergoing surgery at Helsinki University Hospital between 2000 and 2009. We constructed a tumour tissue microarray immunostained for the following markers: microsatellite instability (MSI) markers MSH2, MSH6, MLH1, and PMS2; p53; E-cadherin; and EBERISH.

resultsIn the univariate survival analysis for disease-specific survival, the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) -positive subtype exhibited the worst prognosis with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.49 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19-5.25, p = 0.016) compared with the most benign subtype, chromosomal instability (CIN). Using TCGA's classification, the genetically stable (GS) and MSI subtypes exhibited a worse survival compared with CIN (HR 1.73 [95% CI 1.15-2.60], p = 0.009 and HR 1.74 [95% CI 1.06-2.84], p = 0.027, respectively). Using the ACRG classification, the p53 aberrant subtype exhibited the best prognosis, whereas wild-type p53, MSI, and the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) subtypes exhibited poorer prognoses (EMT: HR 1.90 [95% CI 1.30-2.77], p < 0.001) when compared with aberrant p53.

conclusionsImmunohistochemical analysis can identify prognostically different molecular subtypes of gastric cancer. The method is inexpensive and fast, yet reveals significant information for clinical decision-making. However, our study did not find that either molecular subtyping performed better than the other classification. Thus, further development of the most optimal grouping of different molecular subtypes is still needed.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorImmunohistochemistryMicrosatellite InstabilityStomach NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisTumor Suppressor Protein p53Biomarkers, TumorTumor Suppressor Protein p53Epstein–Barr virusGastric cancerImmunohistochemistrySurvival

Identifiers

PMID39623302
PMCPMC11610213

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.