Carcinoma of the Stomach and Its Heredity in Young Patients

Mecklin∥, Jukka–Pekka; Nordling, Stig; Saario, I.

doi:10.3109/00365528809093870

Cited by 47 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This may indicate differences in exposure to risk factors and differences in prognosis. Diffuse type is known to occur more in younger individuals and to be associated with poor prognosis [20,21]. Such type-age correlation was not evident in our patient population.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 39%

Gastric Cancer in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Population: Prevalence and Clinicopathological Characteristics

Al-Mofleh

1992

Ann Saudi Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 39%

Gastric Cancer in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Population: Prevalence and Clinicopathological Characteristics

Al-Mofleh

1992

Ann Saudi Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It has also been reported that patients with diffuse gastric carcinoma are younger than those with the intestinal-type (Lauren, 1965;Noda et al, 1980;Ribeiro et al, 1981;Hanai et al, 1982;Mecklin et al, 1988). Two studies are concordant that this difference is in the order of 7-8 years (Lauren, 1965;Ribeiro et al, 1981).…”

supporting

confidence: 53%

“…Accordingly, it is recommended that resections should be more extensive in patients with this tumour than in patients with the intestinaltype tumour (Gall & Hermanek 1985, Heberer et al, 1988. It is well documented that the prognosis for the diffuse carcinoma is poorer than for the intestinal-type carcinoma (Lauren, 1965;Stemmermann & Brown, 1974;Ribeiro et al, 1981; Hermanek, 1986;Viste et al, 1986).It has also been reported that patients with diffuse gastric carcinoma are younger than those with the intestinal-type (Lauren, 1965;Noda et al, 1980;Ribeiro et al, 1981;Hanai et al, 1982;Mecklin et al, 1988). Two studies are concordant that this difference is in the order of 7-8 years (Lauren, 1965;Ribeiro et al, 1981).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of age on the growth and spread of gastric carcinoma

Rt²,

Maartmann-Moe³

et al. 1991

Br J Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary A twelve year series of 375 patients with gastric carcinoma has been studied. Patients were divided into TNM Groups. Tumours were classified as intestinal-type and diffuse. The patients with TI -3NOMO diffuse tumour were ten years younger than the patients with TI -3NOMO intestinal-type tumour. The mean age increased from Ti through T2 to those with T3 tumour. The age differences between the T-stages were the same in both groups, which indicate that once started, the diffuse and the intestinal-type tumours infiltrate the gastric wall at about the same rate. Among the patients with intestinal-type tumour, those with lymph node or distant metastases were three to seven years younger than the patients without metastases. On the other hand, the patients with diffuse tumour and metastases were as many years older than the patients without metastases. Apparently, tumour spread is age dependent and different between the two types of gastric carcinoma. The ill repute of the diffuse gastric carcinoma may therefore be explained by the advanced stage of that tumour at the time of treatment as compared to the intestinal-type tumour. The diffuse tumour seems to be clinically more silent and to give symptoms at a later stage than the intestinal-type tumour.Twenty-five years ago Pekka Lauren published his paper on the classification of gastric carcinoma into two main histopathological types, the intestinal-type and the diffuse (Lauren, 1965). Lauren's classification is now widely accepted and numerous reports have described significant differences between the two types of gastric carcinoma.The discrimination between the two types of tumour is particularly important for the clinical management of patients with gastric carcinoma. The diffuse carcinoma tends to be more wide-spread at the time of treatment. Accordingly, it is recommended that resections should be more extensive in patients with this tumour than in patients with the intestinaltype tumour (Gall & Hermanek 1985, Heberer et al., 1988. It is well documented that the prognosis for the diffuse carcinoma is poorer than for the intestinal-type carcinoma (Lauren, 1965;Stemmermann & Brown, 1974;Ribeiro et al., 1981; Hermanek, 1986;Viste et al., 1986).It has also been reported that patients with diffuse gastric carcinoma are younger than those with the intestinal-type (Lauren, 1965;Noda et al., 1980;Ribeiro et al., 1981;Hanai et al., 1982;Mecklin et al., 1988). Two studies are concordant that this difference is in the order of 7-8 years (Lauren, 1965;Ribeiro et al., 1981).It has now become clear that age in itself is a prognosticator of some cancers (Ershler, 1986). Observations of cancers of the lung, breast, colon, prostate gland and kidney have shown that once a tumour has developed, growth and spread are slower in the elderly (Ershler, 1986). In line with these observations, it has also been shown that advancing age reduces growth of some experimental tumours. On the other hand, there are also experimental tumours where the growth is enhanced with increasing age (...

show abstract

“…Previous reports on various populations have suggested that a family history of gastric cancer (GC) is an important risk for GC [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. However, the clinicopathological characteristics of GC with a positive family history of site- specific GC have not been well discussed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Clinicopathological Findings in Patients with Gastric Adenocarcinoma with Familial Aggregation

Ikeguchi¹,

Fukuda²,

Oka³

et al. 2001

Dig Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: The clinicopathological characteristics of gastric cancer (GC) with a positive family history of site-specific GC have not been well discussed. The aim of this study was to estimate the risk of familial aggregation of GC in a hospital-based case-control study and to analyze the clinicopathological characteristics of GC with familial aggregation of GC. Methods: Our series was comprised of 926 histologically confirmed patients with GC (588 males and 338 females) and 2,052 non-cancer outpatients between 1985 and 1996. The odds ratios (ORs), as estimators of relative risks, together with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for a family history of GC and for a family history of other cancers were calculated. Moreover, the clinicopathological findings of patients with GC who had a GC family history were compared with those of patients with GC who had no GC family history. Results: A positive family history of GC was associated with a statistically significant increase in the risk of GC (OR = 2.15; 95% CI = 1.77–2.63), while no association was observed between the risk of GC and a family history of other cancers (OR = 1.11; 95% CI = 0.91–1.36). The incidence of a multifocal occurrence of GCs was higher in patients with a family history of GC (19.4%) than in patients without a family history of GC (12%, p = 0.005). The risk (OR) of occurrence of multiple cancers in the stomach in patients who had a family history of GC was 1.77 (95% CI = 1.19–2.64). Conclusions: Our results suggest that a family history of GC seemed to be a risk factor for the development of GC. Further, a family history of GC was found to be associated with a multifocal occurrence of GC.

show abstract

Carcinoma of the Stomach and Its Heredity in Young Patients

Cited by 47 publications

References 22 publications

Gastric Cancer in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Population: Prevalence and Clinicopathological Characteristics

Gastric Cancer in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Population: Prevalence and Clinicopathological Characteristics

The influence of age on the growth and spread of gastric carcinoma

Clinicopathological Findings in Patients with Gastric Adenocarcinoma with Familial Aggregation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About