Geschwülste des Magens und Duodenums

Borrmann, Robert

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-47989-2_8

Cited by 68 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 104 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The clinicopathological characteristics of the tumors are shown in Table 1. Macroscopic tumor appearance was evaluated according to the Borrmann classification and also considered the tumor localization within the stomach [15]. Tumor histology was determined according to the criteria of the World Health Organization and according to the Laurén and the Ming classifications [16][17][18].…”

Section: Patientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limited Value of KAI1/CD82 Protein Expression as a Prognostic Marker in Human Gastric Cancer

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The cell surface glycoprotein KAI1/CD82 suppresses tumor growth and metastasis in animal models. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic relevance of KAI1/CD82 protein expression in human gastric cancer. Primary gastric carcinomas (n = 271) with a mean clinical follow-up time of 48 months were immunostained using the monoclonal anti-KAI1/CD82 antibody G2. Staining was evaluated as negative versus positive for statistical analysis. KAI1/CD82 immunoreactivity was absent in 103/271 (38%) cases. There was a trend towards KAI1/CD82 negativity in poorly differentiated cases (p = 0.0679). Moreover, KAI1/CD82-negative carcinomas were associated with a higher pT status (p = 0.0222), metastatic lymph node involvement (p = 0.0018) and a higher clinical tumor stage (p = 0.0050). The median overall survival times of KAI1/CD82-negative and KAI1/CD82-positive gastric carcinomas were 20 and 37 months, respectively (p = 0.2305). These results are in line with the proposed function of KAI1/CD82 as a suppressor of tumor growth and metastasis. However, these data suggest that KAI1/CD82, as detected by immunohistochemistry, is of limited value as a prognostic marker for gastric cancer in routine histological workup.

show abstract

Section: Patientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limited Value of KAI1/CD82 Protein Expression as a Prognostic Marker in Human Gastric Cancer

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The location of the tumour was recorded according to the same criteria of image analysis. The morphological subtype of gastric cancer was classified according to the Japanese classification of early gastric cancer and the Borrmann classification of advanced gastric cancer [13,14]. Early gastric cancers were classified as follows: Type I, protruded; Type IIa, superficial elevated; Type IIb, flat; Type IIc, superficial depressed; Type III, excavated.…”

Section: Reference Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between blinded and partially blinded detection of gastric cancer with multidetector CT using surgery and endoscopic submucosal dissection as reference standards

Kim

Lee²,

Ko³

2010

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The aim of this study is to compare blinded with partially blinded detection of gastric cancer with multidetector (MD) CT by using surgery and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as reference standards. 44 patients with gastric cancer underwent MDCT with air as an oral contrast agent. Surgery was performed on 37 patients, ESD on six and surgery after ESD on one. To provide comparison cases of blinded evaluation, 38 MDCT examinations were added for cases where no focal gastric lesion was seen on endoscopy. Two radiologists, blinded to the presence, number and location of the tumours, evaluated axial and axial plus multiplanar reformation (MPR) images of 82 MDCT examinations with or without gastric cancer. For partially blinded evaluation, the same radiologists, blinded to the location and number of tumours, evaluated axial and axial plus MPR images of 44 MDCT examinations of gastric cancer. Differences in assessment were resolved by consensus. 45 gastric cancers were found in surgical and ESD specimens. Detection rates of gastric cancer from axial and axial plus MPR images during blinded evaluation and from axial and axial plus MPR images during partially blinded evaluation were 62% (28/45), 64% (29/45), 64% (29/45) and 71% (32/45), respectively. There was no statistical significance for the comparison between blinded and partially blinded detection rates of gastric cancer. The detection rate of gastric cancer with MDCT during blinded evaluation showed no specific difference compared with the detection rate of gastric cancer with MDCT during partially blinded evaluation. . However, patients with early gastric cancer have 5-year survival rates of more than 85% [3,4]. Therefore, early detection of gastric cancer is essential for the improvement of patient survival and for the reduction of the overall use of medical resources. Although the use of endoscopy and a double-contrast barium study has a significant role in the detection of gastric cancer, the depth of tumour invasion and the presence or absence of metastasis cannot be determined by the use of these modalities. Multidetector CT (MDCT) is usually performed for pre-operative staging work-up of patients with gastric cancer. Accurate evaluation of the location and local extent of the gastric cancer (T stage) is important in the choice of the optimal therapeutic approach. However, if gastric cancer cannot be detected on MDCT, the modality cannot provide the information about the location and T stage of gastric cancer. Thus, lesion detection on MDCT is a prerequisite for gastric cancer staging on MDCT [5].Currently, some early gastric cancers may be treated with laparoscopic gastrectomy or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) without laparotomy [6,7]. However, most studies on gastric cancer have confined the study population to patients who have received a laparotomy [5,[8][9][10][11]. This strict confinement of the study population may result in an overestimation of the detection rate of gastric cancer. Most results for the detection rate of gastr...

show abstract

“…Advanced carcinoma of the stomach can be classified based on Borrmann's criteria into one of four types (1-4) (Borrmann, 1926). A knowledge of this classification is important for endoscopists, radiologists and surgeons (Borchard, 1990).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Proliferative activity as a prognostic factor in Borrmann type 4 gastric carcinoma

et al. 1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geschwülste des Magens und Duodenums

Cited by 68 publications

References 104 publications

Limited Value of KAI1/CD82 Protein Expression as a Prognostic Marker in Human Gastric Cancer

Limited Value of KAI1/CD82 Protein Expression as a Prognostic Marker in Human Gastric Cancer

Comparison between blinded and partially blinded detection of gastric cancer with multidetector CT using surgery and endoscopic submucosal dissection as reference standards

Proliferative activity as a prognostic factor in Borrmann type 4 gastric carcinoma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About