Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37735628›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2023

The minimum number of examined lymph nodes was 24 for optimal survival of pathological T2-4 gastric cancer: a multi-center, hospital-based study covering 20 years of data.

Lulu Zhao, Fan Zhang, Fuzhi Jiao, Xiadong Zhou, Penghui Niu, Xue Han, Wanqing Wang, Xiaoyi Luan, Mingyan He, Quanlin Guan and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lulu Zhao *National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Fan Zhang *Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Fuzhi Jiao *The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Xiadong Zhou *Gansu Provincial Cancer Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Penghui Niu *National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Xue Han *National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Wanqing WangNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Xiaoyi LuanNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Mingyan HeGansu Provincial Cancer Hospital, Lanzhou, China. 119273873@qq.com.
Quanlin GuanThe First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China. guanquanlin@163.com.
Yumin LiLanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China. liym@lzu.edu.cn.
Dongbing ZhaoNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. dbzhao2003@sina.com.
Jidong GaoNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union College, Shenzhen, China. ab168@cicams.ac.cn.
Yingtai ChenNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. yingtaichen@126.com.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNGansu Provincial Hospital · CNLanzhou University · CNLanzhou University Second Hospital · CN

Funding

National Key R&D Program of China No. 2017YFC0908300Non-profit Central Research Institute Fund of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences No. 2021-RC310-009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend that at least 16 lymph nodes should be examined for gastric cancer patients to reduce staging migration. However, there is still debate regarding the optimal management of examined lymph nodes (ELNs) for gastric cancer patients. In this study, we aimed to develop and test the minimum number of ELNs that should be retrieved during gastrectomy for optimal survival in patients with gastric cancer.

methodsWe used the restricted cubic spline (RCS) to identify the optimal threshold of ELNs that should be retrieved during gastrectomy based on the China National Cancer Center Gastric Cancer (NCCGC) database. Northwest cohort, which sourced from the highest gastric cancer incidence areas in China, was used to verify the optimal cutoff value. Survival analysis was performed via Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards models.

resultsIn this study, 12,670 gastrectomy patients were included in the NCCGC cohort and 4941 patients in the Northwest cohort. During 1999-2019, the average number of ELNs increased from 17.88 to 34.45 nodes in the NCCGC cohort, while the number of positive lymph nodes remained stable (5-6 nodes). The RCS model showed a U-curved association between ELNs and the risk of all-cause mortality, and the optimal threshold of ELNs was 24 [Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.00]. The ELN ≥ 24 group had a better overall survival (OS) than the ELN < 24 group clearly (P = 0.003), however, with respect to the threshold of 16 ELNs, there was no significantly difference between the two groups (P = 0.101). In the multivariate analysis, ELN ≥ 24 group was associated with improved survival outcomes in total gastrectomy patients [HR = 0.787, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.711-0.870, P < 0.001], as well as the subgroup analysis of T2 patients (HR = 0.621, 95%CI: 0.399-0.966, P = 0.035), T3 patients (HR = 0.787, 95%CI: 0.659-0.940, P = 0.008) and T4 patients (HR = 0.775, 95%CI: 0.675-0.888, P < 0.001).

conclusionIn conclusion, the minimum number of ELNs for optimal survival of gastric cancer with pathological T2-4 was 24.

Indexed as

Stomach NeoplasmsChinaDatabases, FactualHospitalsHumansLymph NodesExamined lymph nodes (ELNs)GastrectomyGastric CancerPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID37735628
PMCPMC10512540
OpenAlexW4386931241

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.