Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer
Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Song S [verfasserIn] Li C [verfasserIn] Li S [verfasserIn] Cong X [verfasserIn] Xue Y [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2017 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: OncoTargets and Therapy - Dove Medical Press, 2009, (2017), Seite 4795-4802 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
year:2017 ; pages:4795-4802 |
| Links: |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ006965741 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | DOAJ006965741 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230503072507.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 230225s2017 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ006965741 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJc035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a RC254-282 | |
| 100 | 0 | |a Song S |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2017 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19–9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Gastric cancer | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Clinicopathological feature | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Age | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Prognosis | |
| 653 | 0 | |a Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Li C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Li S |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Cong X |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Xue Y |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t OncoTargets and Therapy |d Dove Medical Press, 2009 |g (2017), Seite 4795-4802 |w (DE-627)600307654 |w (DE-600)2495130-4 |x 11786930 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2017 |g pages:4795-4802 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/c035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.dovepress.com/clinicopathological-features-and-prognoses-in-younger-and-older-patien-peer-reviewed-article-OTT |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/1178-6930 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |j 2017 |h 4795-4802 | ||
| author_variant |
s s ss l c lc l s ls c x cx x y xy |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:11786930:2017----::lncptooiafaueadrgoeiyugrnodrai |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2017 |
| callnumber-subject-code |
RC |
| publishDate |
2017 |
| allfields |
(DE-627)DOAJ006965741 (DE-599)DOAJc035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC254-282 Song S verfasserin aut Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19–9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis Gastric cancer Clinicopathological feature Age Prognosis Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Li C verfasserin aut Li S verfasserin aut Cong X verfasserin aut Xue Y verfasserin aut In OncoTargets and Therapy Dove Medical Press, 2009 (2017), Seite 4795-4802 (DE-627)600307654 (DE-600)2495130-4 11786930 nnns year:2017 pages:4795-4802 https://doaj.org/article/c035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 kostenfrei https://www.dovepress.com/clinicopathological-features-and-prognoses-in-younger-and-older-patien-peer-reviewed-article-OTT kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1178-6930 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2017 4795-4802 |
| spelling |
(DE-627)DOAJ006965741 (DE-599)DOAJc035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC254-282 Song S verfasserin aut Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19–9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis Gastric cancer Clinicopathological feature Age Prognosis Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Li C verfasserin aut Li S verfasserin aut Cong X verfasserin aut Xue Y verfasserin aut In OncoTargets and Therapy Dove Medical Press, 2009 (2017), Seite 4795-4802 (DE-627)600307654 (DE-600)2495130-4 11786930 nnns year:2017 pages:4795-4802 https://doaj.org/article/c035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 kostenfrei https://www.dovepress.com/clinicopathological-features-and-prognoses-in-younger-and-older-patien-peer-reviewed-article-OTT kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1178-6930 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2017 4795-4802 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
(DE-627)DOAJ006965741 (DE-599)DOAJc035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC254-282 Song S verfasserin aut Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19–9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis Gastric cancer Clinicopathological feature Age Prognosis Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Li C verfasserin aut Li S verfasserin aut Cong X verfasserin aut Xue Y verfasserin aut In OncoTargets and Therapy Dove Medical Press, 2009 (2017), Seite 4795-4802 (DE-627)600307654 (DE-600)2495130-4 11786930 nnns year:2017 pages:4795-4802 https://doaj.org/article/c035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 kostenfrei https://www.dovepress.com/clinicopathological-features-and-prognoses-in-younger-and-older-patien-peer-reviewed-article-OTT kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1178-6930 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2017 4795-4802 |
| allfieldsGer |
(DE-627)DOAJ006965741 (DE-599)DOAJc035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC254-282 Song S verfasserin aut Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19–9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis Gastric cancer Clinicopathological feature Age Prognosis Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Li C verfasserin aut Li S verfasserin aut Cong X verfasserin aut Xue Y verfasserin aut In OncoTargets and Therapy Dove Medical Press, 2009 (2017), Seite 4795-4802 (DE-627)600307654 (DE-600)2495130-4 11786930 nnns year:2017 pages:4795-4802 https://doaj.org/article/c035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 kostenfrei https://www.dovepress.com/clinicopathological-features-and-prognoses-in-younger-and-older-patien-peer-reviewed-article-OTT kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1178-6930 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2017 4795-4802 |
| allfieldsSound |
(DE-627)DOAJ006965741 (DE-599)DOAJc035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC254-282 Song S verfasserin aut Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19–9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis Gastric cancer Clinicopathological feature Age Prognosis Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Li C verfasserin aut Li S verfasserin aut Cong X verfasserin aut Xue Y verfasserin aut In OncoTargets and Therapy Dove Medical Press, 2009 (2017), Seite 4795-4802 (DE-627)600307654 (DE-600)2495130-4 11786930 nnns year:2017 pages:4795-4802 https://doaj.org/article/c035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 kostenfrei https://www.dovepress.com/clinicopathological-features-and-prognoses-in-younger-and-older-patien-peer-reviewed-article-OTT kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1178-6930 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2017 4795-4802 |
| language |
English |
| source |
In OncoTargets and Therapy (2017), Seite 4795-4802 year:2017 pages:4795-4802 |
| sourceStr |
In OncoTargets and Therapy (2017), Seite 4795-4802 year:2017 pages:4795-4802 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Gastric cancer Clinicopathological feature Age Prognosis Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
| container_title |
OncoTargets and Therapy |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Song S @@aut@@ Li C @@aut@@ Li S @@aut@@ Cong X @@aut@@ Xue Y @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2017-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
600307654 |
| id |
DOAJ006965741 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ006965741</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230503072507.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2017 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ006965741</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJc035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC254-282</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Song S</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19&ndash;9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19&ndash;9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gastric cancer</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Clinicopathological feature</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Age</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Prognosis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li C</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li S</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cong X</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xue Y</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">OncoTargets and Therapy</subfield><subfield code="d">Dove Medical Press, 2009</subfield><subfield code="g">(2017), Seite 4795-4802</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)600307654</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2495130-4</subfield><subfield code="x">11786930</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">year:2017</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:4795-4802</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/c035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.dovepress.com/clinicopathological-features-and-prognoses-in-younger-and-older-patien-peer-reviewed-article-OTT</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1178-6930</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="j">2017</subfield><subfield code="h">4795-4802</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| callnumber-first |
R - Medicine |
| author |
Song S |
| spellingShingle |
Song S misc RC254-282 misc Gastric cancer misc Clinicopathological feature misc Age misc Prognosis misc Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer |
| authorStr |
Song S |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)600307654 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| remote_str |
true |
| callnumber-label |
RC254-282 |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
11786930 |
| topic_title |
RC254-282 Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer Gastric cancer Clinicopathological feature Age Prognosis |
| topic |
misc RC254-282 misc Gastric cancer misc Clinicopathological feature misc Age misc Prognosis misc Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc RC254-282 misc Gastric cancer misc Clinicopathological feature misc Age misc Prognosis misc Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens |
| topic_browse |
misc RC254-282 misc Gastric cancer misc Clinicopathological feature misc Age misc Prognosis misc Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
OncoTargets and Therapy |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
600307654 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
OncoTargets and Therapy |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)600307654 (DE-600)2495130-4 |
| title |
Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)DOAJ006965741 (DE-599)DOAJc035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 |
| title_full |
Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer |
| author_sort |
Song S |
| journal |
OncoTargets and Therapy |
| journalStr |
OncoTargets and Therapy |
| callnumber-first-code |
R |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
true |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2017 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
4795 |
| author_browse |
Song S Li C Li S Cong X Xue Y |
| class |
RC254-282 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Song S |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer |
| callnumber |
RC254-282 |
| title_auth |
Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer |
| abstract |
Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19–9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis |
| abstractGer |
Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19–9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19–9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
| title_short |
Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer |
| url |
https://doaj.org/article/c035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129 https://www.dovepress.com/clinicopathological-features-and-prognoses-in-younger-and-older-patien-peer-reviewed-article-OTT https://doaj.org/toc/1178-6930 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Li C Li S Cong X Xue Y |
| author2Str |
Li C Li S Cong X Xue Y |
| ppnlink |
600307654 |
| callnumber-subject |
RC - Internal Medicine |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
true |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| callnumber-a |
RC254-282 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T23:43:47.780Z |
| _version_ |
1803603387645689856 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ006965741</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230503072507.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2017 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ006965741</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJc035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC254-282</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Song S</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Clinicopathological features and prognoses in younger and older patients with gastric cancer</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shubin Song, Chunfeng Li, Sen Li, Xiliang Cong, Yingwei Xue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China Background and objectives: Patients of different ages with gastric cancer (GC) have different clinicopathological features and prognoses. The results for different crowds are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in clinicopathological features and prognoses between younger and older GC patients.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2011, a consecutive total of 112 GC patients under 41 years old and 358 GC patients over 69 years old who underwent gastrectomy for GC were recruited for this study. Then, the clinicopathological features and prognoses of these patients were analyzed comparatively. Results: The gender, differentiation, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19&ndash;9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were significantly different between younger and older GC patients. There were more female and undifferentiated younger GC patients, and there were higher percentages of positive CA19&ndash;9 and CEA in older GC patients. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was an independent risk parameter for prognosis in younger patients, and the AJCC TNM (Tumor-Nodes-Metastases classification by American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage, radicality and tumor size were independent risk parameters for prognosis in older GC patients. Younger GC patients have a much better prognoses with lower monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and higher prognostic nutritional index than older patients. Conclusions: Younger GC patients have better immunity and nutritional status and better prognoses. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was the only risk parameter for prognosis in younger GC patients. We should take more effective treatments for younger GC patients with lymph nodes metastasis and pay more attention to the nutritional problems of older GC patients. Keywords: gastric cancer, clinicopathological feature, age, prognosis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gastric cancer</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Clinicopathological feature</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Age</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Prognosis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li C</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li S</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cong X</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xue Y</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">OncoTargets and Therapy</subfield><subfield code="d">Dove Medical Press, 2009</subfield><subfield code="g">(2017), Seite 4795-4802</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)600307654</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2495130-4</subfield><subfield code="x">11786930</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">year:2017</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:4795-4802</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/c035fa65db684837a91c2dba4f6ec129</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.dovepress.com/clinicopathological-features-and-prognoses-in-younger-and-older-patien-peer-reviewed-article-OTT</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1178-6930</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="j">2017</subfield><subfield code="h">4795-4802</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.3994675 |