Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40764654›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Positive lymph node ratio as a nodal staging system to avoid stage migration between remnant and primary proximal gastric cancers.

Daiki Matsubara, Shuhei Komatsu, Tomoki Konishi, Keiji Nishibeppu, Takuma Ohashi, Hirotaka Konishi, Takeshi Kubota, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okamoto, Eigo Otsuji and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

11 authors.

Daiki Matsubara *Department of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto First Red Cross Hospital, 15-749 Honmachi, Higashiyama-ku, Kyoto, 605- 0981, Japan.
Shuhei Komatsu *Department of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, 465 Kajii-cho, Kawaramachihirokoji, Kamigyo- ku, Kyoto-shi, Kyoto, Japan. skomatsu@koto.kpu-m.ac.jp.
Tomoki KonishiDepartment of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto First Red Cross Hospital, 15-749 Honmachi, Higashiyama-ku, Kyoto, 605- 0981, Japan.
Keiji NishibeppuDepartment of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, 465 Kajii-cho, Kawaramachihirokoji, Kamigyo- ku, Kyoto-shi, Kyoto, Japan.
Takuma OhashiDepartment of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, 465 Kajii-cho, Kawaramachihirokoji, Kamigyo- ku, Kyoto-shi, Kyoto, Japan.
Hirotaka KonishiDepartment of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, 465 Kajii-cho, Kawaramachihirokoji, Kamigyo- ku, Kyoto-shi, Kyoto, Japan.
Takeshi KubotaDepartment of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, 465 Kajii-cho, Kawaramachihirokoji, Kamigyo- ku, Kyoto-shi, Kyoto, Japan.
Hitoshi FujiwaraDepartment of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, 465 Kajii-cho, Kawaramachihirokoji, Kamigyo- ku, Kyoto-shi, Kyoto, Japan.
Kazuma OkamotoDepartment of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto First Red Cross Hospital, 15-749 Honmachi, Higashiyama-ku, Kyoto, 605- 0981, Japan.
Eigo OtsujiDepartment of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto First Red Cross Hospital, 15-749 Honmachi, Higashiyama-ku, Kyoto, 605- 0981, Japan.
Atsushi ShiozakiDepartment of Digestive Surgery (Gastric and Esophageal Surgery Division), Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, 465 Kajii-cho, Kawaramachihirokoji, Kamigyo- ku, Kyoto-shi, Kyoto, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nodal staging of gastric cancer (GC) based on the number of positive lymph nodes (PLNs) is a robust prognostic factor. However, the number of retrieved lymph nodes in remnant GC (RGC) may be lower than in primary GC owing to variations in the extents of initial gastrectomy and lymphadenectomy. This study evaluated stage migration between RGC and primary proximal gastric cancer (PGC) and the clinical usefulness of the PLN ratio (PLNR) in mitigating stage migration. Among 4,142 patients who underwent gastrectomy, 91 with RGC and 768 with PGC at pStage I-III were retrospectively analyzed. A PLNR of 0.3 was the best-stratified prognosis (p < 0.001). Five-year survival in pN1-3 RGC was worse than in PGC, whereas pN0 showed no prognostic difference. PLNR stratification (0, < 0.3, and ≥ 0.3) effectively distinguished prognosis in patients with RGC (82.2, 46.6, 12.7%, respectively) and PGC (88.9, 63.4, 16.4%, respectively). High PLNR (≥ 0.3) was an independent prognostic factor in RGC (HR: 2.76, 95% CI: 1.06-7.17, p = 0.036), whereas pN stage was not. Prognostic stratification was reliable with at least five dissected lymph nodes. PLNR provides effective prognostic stratification in RGC and helps evaluate stage migration between RGC and primary PGC.

Indexed as

Lymph Node RatioLymph NodesStomach NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleGastrectomyHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRetrospective StudiesGastric cancerPositive lymph-node ratioProximalRemnant

Identifiers

PMID40764654
PMCPMC12326014

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.