ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2025
mTLS status predicts survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in gastric cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy and surgery.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The impact of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) on gastric cancer (GC) patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate the effect of ACT on survival in patients undergoing curative surgery after NACT. Methods: Clinical and pathological data of GC patients treated with NACT followed by radical surgery were retrospectively collected. Patients were categorized according to ACT administration. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to compare the prognosis between those who received ACT and those who did not. Results: After cohort selection and PSM, 180 patients with locally advanced GC were included: 116 in the ACT group and 64 in the no ACT group. No significant difference in overall survival (OS) was observed between the two groups (P=0.46). Subgroup analyses based on tumor invasion depth, lymph node metastasis, histological subtype, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion (PNI), and tumor regression grade (TRG) revealed no significant OS benefit from ACT in any subgroup. In a smaller cohort subset, among patients lacking mature tertiary lymphoid structures (mTLSs) in the tumor bed, the ACT group exhibited a higher OS rate compared with the no ACT group (P=0.006). Conversely, among patients with mTLSs, the no-ACT group demonstrated better survival (P=0.02). Likelihood ratio tests and multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that the effect of ACT on OS depends on mTLS status. In subgroups stratified by mTLS status, ACT was identified as an independent prognostic factor. Conclusions: For patients with locally advanced GC treated with NACT, ACT does not confer a significant survival benefit in the overall population. The presence of mTLSs following NACT serves as a strong predictive biomarker for ACT efficacy. Patients without mTLSs in the tumor bed after NACT may derive greater benefit from ACT.
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.