• Int. J. Clin. Pract. · Nov 2021

    Comparison of staging systems in gastric carcinoma.

    • Ihsan Gunduz, Turker Acehan, Ali Alemdar, Aziz Ahmet Surel, and Nazim Coskun.
    • Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Dr Ismail Fehmi Cumalioglu City Hospital, Tekirdag, Turkey.
    • Int. J. Clin. Pract. 2021 Nov 1; 75 (11): e14703.

    AimGastric carcinoma is one of the most frequent cancers and leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Treatment strategies are planned according to the Tumour-Node-Metastasis (TNM) stage of the disease. However, the prognosis varies substantially even within the same stage. Prognostic nomograms were designed to overcome this diversity. In this study, staging systems and prognostic tools are compared in the context of their ability to predict patients' prognosis.MethodsRecords of 391 patients operated for gastric cancer from January 2006 to September 2013 were analysed retrospectively. TNM staging system, Metastatic lymph node ratio (LNR), Kattan Prognostic Tool and Prognostic Tool of Italian Research Group on Gastric Cancer (GIRCG) were compared with the patients' survival times by their concordance indices and correlation coefficients.ResultsA total of 343 patients were included in the study. Concordance indices of the compared staging systems were 0.678 for TNM, 0.601 for GIRCG scale, 0.646 for LNR stage and 0.680 for Kattan scale. Pearson correlation coefficients were 0.404 for TNM staging, 0.314 for GIRCG scale, 0.304 for LNR stage and -0.406 for Kattan scale. Spearman correlation coefficients were 0.383, 0.311, 0.310 and -0.400 respectively.ConclusionBased on these results, Kattan prognostic scale was found to be the most accurate system for predicting mortality. This was followed by TNM staging system.© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…