ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Integration of objective nutritional status and tumor burden predicts 5-year survival after gastric cancer surgery: 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to develop an objective prognostic score by integrating nutritional indices and tumor burden to improve long-term survival prediction after gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
methodsThis multicenter study included 1395 patients with gastric cancer who underwent curative gastrectomy and were divided into a training (n = 1006) cohort and an external validation (n = 389) cohort. In the training cohort, the optimal objective nutritional index was identified among the five candidates. Random forest analysis was used to screen key preoperative biomarkers, and the Objective Nutrition and Tumor Burden Score (ONTBS) was developed using Cox regression. Model performance was assessed using AUC, C-index, AIC, BIC, and decision curve analysis.
resultsAmong the five nutritional scores, CONUT showed the best survival prediction (AUC = 0.580).Random forest analysis identified CA19-9 (p < 0.001) and CEA (p = 0.01) as the most prognostically relevant biomarkers. Multivariate Cox analysis confirmed CONUT (HR 1.130, 95% CI 1.032-1.237, p = 0.008), CA19-9 (HR 1.0021, 95% CI 1.001-1.002, p < 0.001), pT stage (pT3: HR 4.311, 95% CI 2.553 -7.279, p < 0.001; pT4: HR 7.020, 95% CI 4.010 -12.291, p < 0.001), and PLNR (HR 1.040, 95% CI 1.028 -1.053, p < 0.001) as independent risk factors, forming the ONTBS. In the training cohort, ONTBS showed a higher C-index (0.83) than TNM (0.81) and CONUT (0.57), with lower AIC (3399.37) and BIC (3403.02) values than TNM (3441.86 and 3445.51) and CONUT (3798.61 and 3802.26), respectively. Time-dependent ROC curve and DCA demonstrated consistently superior performance and clinical benefits, as confirmed by the external validation cohort.
conclusionsONTBS integrates objective nutritional status and tumor burden and outperforms TNM staging in predicting long-term survival after curative gastric cancer surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42458033What 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.