Age-Stratified Clinicopathological Features and Efficacy of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Resectable Gastric Cancer: An East-West Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The incidence of early-onset gastric cancer (EOGC) has been steadily increasing in recent years. However, the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in this population remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the clinicopathological characteristics, survival outcomes, and efficacy of AC between EOGC and average-onset gastric cancer (AOGC) patients. Methods: Patients with stage II–III gastric adenocarcinomas who underwent curative D2 gastrectomy at the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from January 2014 to December 2021 were enrolled and classified into two groups: EOGC (≤45 years) and AOGC (>45 years) groups. Clinicopathological characteristics, overall survival (OS), and efficacy of AC were compared between the two groups. Western and East Asian cohorts were included as external validation sets to compare the efficacy of AC between different age groups. Results: Compared to AOGC, EOGC patients exhibited a higher proportion of females, poor differentiation, diffuse Lauren type, middle-third GC, perineural invasion (PNI), and receipt of AC. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified that T stage, N stage, PNI, and AC were independent prognostic factors for OS. After balancing the baseline characteristics between patients who received AC and those who did not, the Kaplan–Meier survival curves indicated that AC significantly improved OS across all patients. Further subgroup analysis revealed a survival benefit of AC in AOGC patients, whereas no significant survival difference was observed in the EOGC subgroup. Consistently, external validation in both Western and East Asian cohorts confirmed that AC did not confer a survival advantage in EOGC patients. Conclusions: EOGC exhibits aggressive pathological characteristics, and chemotherapy does not consistently improve survival in EOGC patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".