4.6 Article

A retrospective 5-year survival analysis of surgically resected gastric cancer cases from the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association nationwide registry (2001-2013)

Journal

GASTRIC CANCER
Volume 25, Issue 6, Pages 1082-1093

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10120-022-01317-6

Keywords

Gastric cancer; Nationwide registry; Survival

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study retrospectively analyzed data from surgically resected cases of gastric cancer collected by the nationwide registry of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association between 2001 and 2013. The analysis focused on tumor characteristics, surgical history, and survival distribution, providing a robust dataset for future analysis.
Background The nationwide registry of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association collected data of surgically resected cases of gastric cancer between 2001 and 2013. These retrospective analyses aimed to delineate tumor characteristics, surgical history, and survival distribution. Methods Data from 254,706 patients with primary gastric cancer were included. The 5-year survival rates were calculated for various subsets of prognostic factors. Results The number of patients over 70 years old increased from 2001 to 2013. The frequency with which laparoscopic gastrectomy was opted for increased dramatically (from 3.5 to 40.8%) in 13 years. We focused on the patients registered between 2010 and 2013, for whom data collection was based on the 3rd edition of the Japanese classification and guidelines. Five-year overall survival (OS) rate among 92,305 patients with resected tumors was 70.6%. The 5-year OS rates of patients with pathological stage IA, IB, IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, and IV disease were 89.6%, 83.2%, 77.6%, 68.1%, 59.3%, 45.6%, 29.9%, and 14.0%, respectively. Conclusion Our detailed analysis highlights the historical changes in outcomes of surgically treated gastric malignancies in Japan, and provides robust dataset for future analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available