↓ Skip to main content

Proposal of a new stage grouping of gastric cancer for TNM classification: International Gastric Cancer Association staging project

Overview of attention for article published in Gastric Cancer, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Proposal of a new stage grouping of gastric cancer for TNM classification: International Gastric Cancer Association staging project
Published in
Gastric Cancer, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10120-016-0601-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takeshi Sano, Daniel G. Coit, Hyung Ho Kim, Franco Roviello, Paulo Kassab, Christian Wittekind, Yuko Yamamoto, Yasuo Ohashi

Abstract

The current AJCC staging system for gastric cancer (AJCC7) incorporated several major revisions to the previous edition. The T and N categories and the stage groups were newly defined, and adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) was reclassified and staged according to the esophageal system. Studies to validate these changes showed inconsistent results. The International Gastric Cancer Association (IGCA) launched a project to support evidence-based revisions to the next edition of the AJCC staging system. Clinical and pathological data on patients who underwent curative gastrectomy at 59 institutions in 15 countries between 2000 and 2004 were retrospectively collected. Patients lost to follow-up within 5 years of surgery were excluded. Patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy were excluded. The data were analyzed in total, and separately by region of treatment. Of 25,411 eligible cases, 84.8 % were submitted from 24 institutions of Japan and Korea, 6.4 % from other Asian countries, and 8.8 % from 29 Western institutions. The T and N categories of AJCC7 clearly stratified the patient survival. Patients with pN3a and pN3b showed distinct prognosis in all regions, and by introducing pN3a and pN3b into a cluster analysis, we established a new stage grouping with better stratification than AJCC7, especially among stage III subgroups. Survival of Siewert type 2 and 3 EGJ tumors was better stratified by this IGCA stage grouping than by either esophageal or gastric scheme of AJCC7. For the next revision of AJCC classification, we propose a new stage grouping based on a large, worldwide data collection.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 8 22%
Student > Postgraduate 7 19%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Other 7 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 58%
Unspecified 11 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 March 2017.
All research outputs
#5,000,385
of 9,183,818 outputs
Outputs from Gastric Cancer
#60
of 177 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,517
of 253,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Gastric Cancer
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,183,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 177 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 253,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.