Outcomes of patients with nonmetastatic gastric adenocarcinoma according to perioperative treatment strategy: a real-world, population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To assess the survival outcomes of patients with nonmetastatic gastric cancer according to the type of perioperative treatment strategy used (surgery-only, adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, perioperative chemotherapy) in a population-based setting. Materials & methods: Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results research-plus database was explored, and patients with nonmetastatic gastric cancer who were treated with an oncologic surgery were reviewed. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to examine the impact of treatment strategy on overall and cancer-specific survival. Results: A total of 11,526 patients were found to be eligible and they were included in the current analysis. Looking at the percentages of different treatment strategies throughout the study years (2006–2017), the use of the following strategies increased: adjuvant chemotherapy (20.1 vs 10.6%), and perioperative chemotherapy (21.3 vs 0.5%); while the use of the following strategies decreased: surgery only (36.2 vs 58.2%), and adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (22.4 vs 30.6%). Using multivariable Cox regression analysis, the following factors were associated with worse overall survival: older age (hazard [HR]: 1.021; 95% CI: 1.018–1.023), males (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.04–1.14), Black race (HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.04–1.19), cardia subsite (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.02–1.17), grade 3–4 (HR:1.32; 95% CI: 1.25–1.40), diffuse histology (HR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.35–1.58), clinically node positive (HR:1.43; 95% CI: 1.34–1.53), total gastrectomy (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.13–1.28), and surgery-only approach (HR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.55–1.75). Conclusion: Among patients with localized gastric cancer, patients who were treated with surgery-only, and to a less extent, patients who were treated with surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy have worse survival outcomes; while those treated with perioperative chemotherapy have the best survival outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".