Burden and Future Trends of Gastric Cancer in 5 East Asian Countries From 1990 to 2036: Epidemiological Study Analysis Using the Global Burden of Diseases Study 2021
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Effective prevention and treatment are urgently needed, since gastric cancer (GC) poses a grave threat to the health and well-being of patients. The 5 East Asian countries (China, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, and Mongolia) represent one of the most significant regions globally in terms of GC burden. Objective: The goal of this study is to examine the patterns and trends of GC across 5 East Asian countries between 1990 and 2021. Methods: We retrieved data from the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD) 2021 regarding the prevalence, incidence, mortality, years lived with disability (YLDs), years of life lost (YLLs), and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) associated with GC in 5 East Asian countries from 1990 to 2021. We further assessed the burden of GC according to age and sex. We used decomposition analysis to examine the changes in the number of new cases, patients, and deaths related to GC. We also used Joinpoint (Joinpoint Regression Program, Version 5.1.0) and age-period-cohort analysis methods to interpret the epidemiological characteristics of GC. Autoregressive integrated moving average model (ARIMA) and Bayesian age-period-cohort (BAPC) prediction models were used to forecast the GC burden by 2036. Results: Among the 5 East Asian countries, China recorded the highest incidence, prevalence, death, YLLs, YLDs, and DALYs in both 1990 and 2021. From 1990 to 2021, the age-standardized rates for prevalence, mortality, incidence, YLDs, YLLs, and DALYs across the 5 East Asian countries showed an overall decline, though they remained higher than the global average. In all 5 East Asian countries, individuals aged 65 years and older consistently exhibited the highest rates for prevalence, incidence, mortality, YLDs, YLLs, and DALYs. The prevalence rate in South Korea, the incidence rate in North Korea and Mongolia, and the mortality rate in China are influenced by aging, surpassing the global aging average. Conclusions: The disease burden of GC in the 5 East Asian countries has consistently ranked high over the past 3 decades, particularly among the older individuals. The burden of GC in the 5 East Asian countries is expected to present a major public health challenge, primarily driven by the large population size and the aging demographic.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".