ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Analysis of differences between early-onset and late-onset early gastric cancer treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers worldwide, with high incidence and mortality rates. The aim of this study was to analyze the differences in demographics, lesion morphology, and pathology between early-onset and late-onset early gastric cancer. Patients and methods: A total of 37 early-onset early gastric cancer (EO-EGC) patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) were included in the study. For comparison, 37 late-onset early gastric cancer (LO-EGC) patients who underwent ESD during the same period were randomly selected as the control group. We compared EO-EGC and LO-EGC with respect to lesion size, location, color, postoperative pathological type, depth of invasion, and postoperative complications. Results: The LO-EGC group had significantly more hypertensive patients ( Conclusions: EO-EGC and LO-EGC exhibit significant differences in hypertension comorbidity, lesion size and pathological type, while their lesion distribution and perioperative clinical outcomes remain similar.
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.