ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2025
Evaluating log odds of positive lymph nodes as a prognostic tool in differentiated gastric cancer: A retrospective study.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Log Odds of Positive Lymph Nodes Improves Risk Stratification for Early Recurrence and Survival After Radical Esophagectomy for cT3 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Preoperative colon cancer nodal staging using dual-energy CT and clinically derived features.European radiology · 2026Article
- Development and external validation of a prognostic nomogram for cancer-specific survival in elderly patients with early-stage gastric cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- TRIM26 deficiency drives gastric cancer lymph node metastasis via TGF-β signaling activation and modulates gemcitabine response.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- From centripetal to centrifugal: pathological regression patterns after neoadjuvant or conversion therapy as markers of nodal risk and a framework for future research on individualized lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS) are correlated with survival outcomes in gastric cancer (GC) patients. However, the prognostic value across different tumor differentiation levels remains unclear.
aimTo evaluate the independent prognostic value of LODDS and the stratified predictive efficacy in GC patients with different histologic differentiations.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of 2103 GC patients who underwent radical gastrectomy at Zhejiang Cancer Hospital. The prognostic value of LODDS was compared with that of other lymph node-based metrics, including the pathologic N stage, number of positive lymph nodes, number of total lymph nodes, and lymph node ratio, stratified by tumor differentiation.
resultsLODDS was identified as an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in moderately to poorly differentiated GC patients. LODDS demonstrated superior predictive accuracy over other lymph node metrics. A nomogram incorporating LODDS, age, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 125, carcinoembryonic antigen, and tumor differentiation showed good predictive accuracy (C-index = 0.703). A higher LODDS was significantly associated with an increased risk of recurrence or metastasis, poorly differentiated tumors, advanced cancer, mucinous gastric adenocarcinoma, nerve invasion, and vascular tumor thrombus. Additionally, LODDS was positively correlated with the tumor markers CA19-9, CA72-4, CA125, and CA242 (all
conclusionLODDS is an independent prognostic indicator for patients with moderately and poorly differentiated GC, and its predictive performance is superior to that of other models.
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.