Prognosis and Clinicopathologic Features in Patients with Gastric Stump Cancer after Curative Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Gastric stump (“remnant”) cancer is the development of a malignancy related to previous gastric surgery. Prognosis in gastric stump cancer, compared with that in primary gastric cancer, is still controversial. Methods: From January 1988 to December 2012 at a single medical centre in Taiwan, 105 patients with gastric stump cancer, including 85 with previous peptic ulcer disease and 20 with previous gastric cancer, were analyzed for clinicopathologic characteristics and overall survival (os). Results: The 5-year os rates for patients with gastric stump cancer and with primary gastric cancer were 51.2% and 54.5% respectively (p = 0.035). Analysis of clinicopathologic characteristics indicated that, compared with patients having primary gastric cancer, those with gastric stump cancer had more lymph node metastasis (p < 0.001) and had been diagnosed at a more advanced stage (p = 0.047). Multivariate analysis with os as an endpoint showed that age [p = 0.015; hazard ratio (hr): 2.300; 95% confidence interval (ci): 1.173 to 4.509], tumour size (p = 0.037; hr: 1.700; 95% ci: 1.031 to 2.801), stromal reaction (p = 0.021; hr: 1.802; 95% ci: 1.094 to 2.969), and pathologic N category (p = 0.001; hr: 1.449; 95% ci: 1.161 to 1.807) were independent predictors in gastric stump cancer. The os rates for patients with gastric stump cancer who previously had gastric cancer or peptic ulcer disease were 72.9% and 50.0% respectively (p = 0.019). The Borrmann classification was more superficial (p = 0.005), lymph node metastases were fewer (p = 0.004), and staging was less advanced (p = 0.025) in patients with gastric stump cancer who previously had gastric cancer than in their counterparts who previously had peptic ulcer disease. Conclusions: Survival is poorer in patients with gastric stump cancer who previously had peptic ulcer disease than in those who previously had primary gastric cancer. Patients with gastric stump cancer who previously had gastric cancer and could receive curative gastrectomy tended to have a better prognosis because of a more superficial Borrmann classification. Regular follow-up in patients who have undergone gastric surgery is recommended for the early detection of gastric stump cancer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".