ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2025
Correlation between Tomographic and Histopathological Staging in Upfront Resected Gastric Cancer: Enhancing Diagnostic Accuracy in the Era of Perioperative Therapy.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of multidetector contrast-enhanced computerised tomography (MDCT) and to establish a correlation between radiological and histopathological staging in upfront resected localised gastric cancers (GC).
methodsAll consecutive patients of resectable, localised GC who underwent upfront elective resection between 2010 and 2022 were included. The initial clinical staging determined during multidisciplinary meetings was compared with the pathological stage obtained after surgery. Subsequently, a retrospective, blinded review was conducted to assign a revised clinical staging, and accuracy was correlated.
resultsThe analysis of 138 patients revealed varying accuracy of MDCT in determining the T stage (66.9% for T1/T2, 64.6% for T3, and 87.2% for T4) and N stage (60.8% for N0, 63.7% for N1, and 83.2% for N2). The accuracy for stage group ranged from 71 to 78.65%. There was weak agreement observed between the T, N, and overall stage on clinicopathological correlation. However, a blinded radiology review by oncoradiologists resulted in improved accuracy, particularly in T1/T2 disease, and also improved pathological stage correlation.
conclusionsAlthough MDCT is a valuable initial staging tool for gastric cancer, we found weak agreement between the clinical and the pathological stages in upfront resected gastric cancers. By implementing an expert radiology review and standardising scanning and reporting protocols, we can significantly improve the accuracy and correlation of MDCT with pathology, even for T1/T2 disease. This may help in better selecting patients for upfront surgery versus perioperative chemotherapy, especially in resource-constrained settings.
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.