A112 OUTCOMES OF PATIENTS AT INCREASED RISK FOR GASTRIC NEOPLASIA: A RETROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Gastric cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related deaths, with 784,000 deaths annually and a 26% five-year overall survival. In contrast, the five-year survival in Japan exceeds 70%, which is in part attributed to increased awareness and surveillance for patients and increased risk of gastric cancer. Aims We aimed to evaluate outcomes of patients at increased risk of gastric cancer in a North American tertiary referral center. Methods Between 01/2012 to 07/2024, consecutive patients with gastric atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, and low-grade or high-grade gastric dysplasia were identified using a validated histopathology registry at St. Paul’s Hospital (Vancouver, BC, Canada). Full chart review was then completed, including demographic and outcome variables. Continuous variables were summarised using median (IQR) and categorical variables were summarised as frequencies (%). Results Preliminary analysis from 01/2012 to 5/2014 identified 127 patients: 8 (6%) gastric atrophy, 114 (90%) gastric intestinal metaplasia, 5 (4%) low- or high-grade dysplasia. Median patient age was 65 (56-75) years, with 61 (48%) being female. Concomitant Helicobacter pylori was identified in 34 (27%) with 12 (9%) receiving eradication therapy and confirmation of eradication. Follow-up data was available for a median of 5.7 (0.4-10.3) years. Endoscopic surveillance was performed in 38 (30%) patients. Gastric cancer was not identified during surveillance, with 1 (1%) patient developing dysplasia. Conclusions Patients at increased risk of gastric cancer represent a significant clinical burden within tertiary gastroenterology centers. Gastric cancer risk commonly goes unrecognized leading to low rates of endoscopic surveillance. Programmatic management may lead to optimized outcomes and resource utilization. Funding Agencies None
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".