Long-term outcomes of additional surgery versus non-gastrectomy treatment for early gastric cancer after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection: a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection is increasingly used in the treatment for early gastric cancer (EGC); however, about 15% of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) cases report non-curative resection. The efficacy of different remedial interventions after non-curative ESD for EGC remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of additional surgery and non-gastrectomy treatment for EGC patients who underwent non-curative ESD. METHODS: All relevant studies published up to October 2021 were systematically searched in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases. The medical subject headings terms "early gastric cancer," "gastrectomy," "endoscopic submucosal dissection," and their related free keywords were used to search relevant articles without restrictions on regions, publication types, or languages. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), disease-free survival (DFS) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs of OS were calculated using a random- or fixed-effects model. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 17 retrospective cohort studies with 5880 patients, of whom 3167 underwent additional surgery and 2713 underwent non-gastrectomy. We found that patients receiving additional gastrectomy had better 5-year OS (OR = 3.63, 95% CI = 3.05-4.31), DSS (OR = 3.22, 95% CI = 2.22-4.66), and DFS (OR = 4.39, 95% CI = 1.78-10.82) outcomes than those receiving non-gastrectomy treatments. The pooled HR also showed that gastrectomy following non-curative ESD significantly improved OS (HR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.33-0.48). In addition, elderly patients benefited from additional surgery in consideration of the 5-year OS (HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.41-0.72). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with non-gastrectomy treatments, additional surgery offered better long-term survival outcomes for patients with EGC who underwent non-curative ESD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".