ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Can combined biochemical and radiological responses enhance prognostic assessment after neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer? A multicenter real-world study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer is assessed by RECIST but overlooks microscopic changes; incorporating CEA dynamics may improve evaluation accuracy.
methodsRetrospective analysis of 600 locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) patients (training:457; validation:143) from nine tertiary hospitals. The Biochemical and Radiologic Response System (BRRS) integrated RECIST 1.1-stratified radiological responses and peri-NAT carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) dynamics. Predictive performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves(AUC), time-dependent ROC, Akaike(AIC) and Bayesian(BIC) information criteria.
resultsThe BRRS was developed through Kaplan-Meier analysis of biochemical/radiologic responses to NACT, classifying 457 training-cohort patients into dual (DR, n = 168), single (SR, n = 185), and no responders (NR, n = 104).Three-year overall survival (OS) rates were 74.4% (DR), 60.6% (SR), and 35.0% (NR) (all P < 0.001). ypTNM 3-year OS rates were 96.4% (stage 0), 82.1% (stage I), 72.7% (stage II), 42.5% (stage III) (I vs. 0: P = 0.405; II vs. I: P = 0.122; III vs. II: P < 0.001), and tumor regression grade(TRG) 3-year OS rates were 93.6, 74.1, 45.9, 46.7% (TRG1 vs. 0:P = 0.060; TRG2 vs. 1:P = 0.001; TRG3 vs. 2:P = 0.583). BRRS (AUC = 0.708, AIC = 992.57, BIC = 995.20) outperformed ypTNM (AUC = 0.678, AIC = 1007.18, BIC = 1008.81) and TRG (AUC = 0.661, AIC = 1012.03, BIC = 1015.65) in OS prediction. Adjuvant chemotherapy improved OS/disease-free survival (DFS) in SR (OS:62.9 vs. 41.4%, P = 0.041; DFS:55.7 vs. 31.6%, P = 0.020) and NR groups (OS:39.1 vs. 16.7%, P = 0.030; DFS: 36.1 vs. 11.9%, P = 0.019) but not in DR (OS: 75.4 vs. 66.7%, P = 0.765; DFS: 66.7 vs. 71.4%, P = 0.455). The results from the validation cohort were consistent.
conclusionBRRS outperformed conventional ypTNM and TRG systems in prognostication. Postoperative chemotherapy may be omitted in DR patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42310198What 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.