Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40181293›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2025

Clinicopathologic characteristics and prognostic factors of pure gastric neuroendocrine carcinoma patients undergoing radical surgery.

Kai Zhou, Xiao Hu, Xuesong Yang, Yan Wu, Ke Ji, Xin Ji, Ji Zhang, Xiaojiang Wu, ZhongWu Li, Anqiang Wang and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2025. 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
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.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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.

Kai Zhou *Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Center of Gastrointestinal Cancer, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Xiao Hu *Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Department of Pathology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Xuesong Yang *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, 518036, China.
Yan WuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Department of Pathology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Ke JiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Center of Gastrointestinal Cancer, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Xin JiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Center of Gastrointestinal Cancer, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Ji ZhangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Center of Gastrointestinal Cancer, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Xiaojiang WuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Center of Gastrointestinal Cancer, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
ZhongWu LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Department of Pathology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Anqiang WangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Center of Gastrointestinal Cancer, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China. wanganqiang0902@163.com.
Yusheng WangDepartment of Oncology Digestive, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Shanxi, China. wangyusheng1972@163.com.
Zhaode BuState Key Laboratory of Holistic Integrative Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers, Center of Gastrointestinal Cancer, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China. buzhaode@cjcrcn.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a low incidence of gastric neuroendocrine carcinoma (G-NEC), but it is associated with particularly aggressive biological behaviours and poor prognosis compared with other gastric neoplasms. Our study aimed to investigate the clinicopathologic traits and prognostic factors of patients with pure gastric neuroendocrine carcinoma treated with radical surgery.

methodsWe retrospectively analysed 60 patients with pure G-NEC who underwent radical gastrectomy between March 2010 and May 2019. 68 patient who underwent curative surgery for mixed gastric adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma (G-ANEC) from August 2012 to June 2022. The relationships between the clinicopathologic characteristics of pure G-NEC and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), as well as the comparison of pure-NEC with G-ANEC in terms of prognosis and treatment regimens, were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and (or) Cox regression.

resultsThe gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) was the predilection site for G-NEC. Tumor location, histology, and lymph node metastasis status were independent prognostic factors for OS (P < 0.05). Pathological T stage and the presence or absence of lymph node metastasis were independently associated variables with DFS (P = 0.019 and P = 0.041). Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCGNEC) did not differ statistically from the small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (SCGNEC) (P = 0.314) for OS, while mixed type (MGNEC) vs. LCGNEC did differ significantly (P = 0.031). There were no significant differences in OS and DFS between etoposide and cisplatin (EP) and S-1 + oxaliplatin (SOX) / oxaliplatin + capecitabine (XELOX). The study of 106 patients found no significant impact of NEC proportion on OS (P = 0.438) or DFS (P = 0.079). Neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy targeting NEC versus adenocarcinoma showed no statistical difference in OS (P = 0.415, P = 0.350), but there was a trend toward longer survival with NEC-targeted regimen.

conclusionsThe LCGNEC did not differ statistically from the SCGNEC for OS, while the MGNEC vs. LCGNEC were different. The prognosis of G-NEC was related to the tumor location, histology, postoperative T stage, and lymph node metastasis. For gastric neuroendocrine carcinoma, prognosis does not differ statistically by NEC proportion. Chemotherapy regimens targeting lymph node metastases with an NEC component maybe better prognosis than those focusing on the adenocarcinoma component.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, NeuroendocrineGastrectomyStomach NeoplasmsAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRetrospective StudiesClinicopathologic characteristicsDisease-free survival timeOverall survival timePure gastric neuroendocrine carcinomaRadical surgery

Identifiers

PMID40181293
PMCPMC11970028

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.