ArticleThe oncologist2025
Timing and clinical significance of chemotherapy in patients with resected gastric adenocarcinoma: a population-based cohort study.
Article in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study was to assess the impact of chemotherapy sequence on the prognosis of patients with gastric cancer (GC) undergoing gastrectomy and identify optimal chemotherapy timing along with potential candidates. PATIENTS AND
methodsData on patients who underwent gastrectomy were extracted from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. Treatment strategies were categorized into neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), adjuvant chemotherapy (AC), and perioperative chemotherapy (PC), with subsequent analyses of clinical outcomes. Stable inverse probability of treatment weighting (sIPTW) and subgroup analyses were conducted to evaluate the significance of chemotherapy timing.
resultsAmong 4914 patients, 38.4% received NAC, 45% received AC, and 16.6% received PC. The 5-year OS rates for the entire cohort were 41.2%. Although no significant differences were observed between NAC and AC, PC exhibited a substantial improvement in OS compared to both. Multivariate analysis highlighted chemotherapy timing as a prognostic factor for OS. Even after sIPTW, PC still demonstrated significantly longer OS compared to NAC and AC, and this trend persisted across almost all subgroups. Even after patients underwent NAC and gastrectomy, AC remained essential. Notably, potential candidates exempt from AC were identified, including patients aged ≥65 years and those with tumor grades I-II.
conclusionsChemotherapy timing was an independent prognostic factor for resected GC. PC presented as a promising strategy, displaying superior OS compared to both NAC and AC. However, older individuals and those with well-differentiated tumors could be considered exempt from further AC after receiving NAC and gastrectomy. Further research is needed to validate these findings and optimize GC management.
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.