Literature DB >> 29409475

Impact of body mass index on surgical outcomes of gastric cancer.

Fan Feng1, Gaozan Zheng1, Xiaohua Guo1, Zhen Liu1, Guanghui Xu1, Fei Wang1,2, Qiao Wang1,3, Man Guo1, Xiao Lian1, Hongwei Zhang4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The association between body mass index (BMI) and clinical outcomes of gastric cancer were still under debate. The aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of BMI on intraoperative conditions, postoperative complications and prognosis of gastric cancer.
METHODS: From October 2008 to March 2015, 1210 gastric cancer patients treated with D2 gastrectomy were enrolled in the present study. Patients were divided into three groups: low BMI group (BMI < 18.5 Kg/m2), normal BMI group (18.5 Kg/m2 ≤ BMI < 25.0 Kg/m2) and high BMI group (BMI ≥ 25.0 Kg/m2). Clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of patients were recorded and analyzed. Propensity score matching was used to match patients in the three groups.
RESULTS: There were 107 patients in low BMI group (8.9%), 862 patients in normal BMI group (71.2%) and 241 patients in high BMI group (19.95%). Before matching, BMI was inversely associated with tumor size, tumor depth, lymph node metastasis (LNM) and tumor stage (all P < 0.05). After matching, the clinicopathological features were all comparable among the three groups (all P > 0.05). High BMI was associated with increased blood loss and operation time, and deceased number of retrieved lymph nodes (all P < 0.05). For postoperative complications, low BMI was associated with decreased rate of postoperative fever (P = 0.025). Age, BMI, tumor size, Borrmann type, pathological type, type of gastrectomy, tumor depth, LNM and tumor stage were risk factors for the prognosis of gastric cancer. Multivariate analysis showed that only BMI, tumor size, tumor depth and LNM were independent prognostic factors. The overall survival of patients with low BMI was significantly worse than patients with normal (P < 0.05) or high BMI (P < 0.05). However, the overall survival was comparable between patients with normal and high BMI (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: BMI was inversely associated with tumor size, tumor depth, LNM and tumor stage. High BMI was associated with increased blood loss and operation time, and deceased number of retrieved lymph nodes. Low BMI was associated with decreased rate of postoperative fever and decreased survival.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BMI; Complications; Gastric cancer; Prognosis

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29409475      PMCID: PMC5801809          DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4063-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Cancer        ISSN: 1471-2407            Impact factor:   4.430


Background

Gastric cancer is the fourth most common cancer in the world [1] and the second most common cancer in China [2]. Surgical resection with extended lymph node clearance remains the only curative treatment for gastric cancer. It is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Thus, the prognosis of gastric cancer is still not promising, even with the rapid advances in surgical techniques and adjuvant therapy [3]. Tumor patients always tend to suffer from malnutrition and lose weight because of decreased oral intake and alterations in metabolism [4]. The incidence of malnutrition in tumor patients is reported to be ranged from 10% to 85% according to the type, location and stage, etc. [4]. Body mass index (BMI) was an effective measurement for evaluating nutritional status of cancer patients [5]. In recent years, the associations between BMI and clinical outcomes of cancer patients have been widely investigated [6-9], including gastric cancer [10]. Some studies reported that BMI was associated with postoperative complications [4] and prognosis [11] of gastric cancer. However, no association between BMI and clinical outcomes of gastric cancer has also been reported [12, 13]. Given this situation, the aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of BMI on the clinical outcomes of gastric cancer.

Methods

This study was performed in the Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases affiliated to the Fourth Military Medical University. From October 2008 to March 2015, 1210 gastric cancer patients treated with D2 gastrectomy were enrolled in the present study. All patients were treated with total, proximal or distal D2 gastrectomy. The surgical procedure was based on the recommendations of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines [14]. The postoperative chemotherapy was given to patients according to the NCCN guideline for gastric cancer. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Xijing Hospital, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients before surgery. Clinicopathological data including gender, age, BMI, tumor location, tumor size, Borrmann type, pathological type, type of gastrectomy, tumor depth, lymph node metastasis and tumor stage were collected. Surgery-related data including blood loss, operation time, number of retrieved lymph nodes and length of postoperative stay were recoded. Postoperative complications within 30 days including pneumonia, fever, wound disruption, wound infection, abdominal bleeding, anastomosis leakage, chyle leakage, gastric stasis, pleural effusion and ileus were also recorded through telephone and outpatient follow up. The survival of patients was followed up till November 2016 every 3 months. BMI was calculated as body weight (kilograms) divided by height (meters) squared. Patients were divided into three groups according to BMI level: low BMI group (BMI < 18.5 Kg/m2), normal BMI group (18.5 Kg/m2 ≤ BMI < 25.0 Kg/m2) and high BMI group (BMI ≥ 25.0 Kg/m2). To reduce bias, propensity score matching was used in our present study. The parameters used for propensity score matching was age, gender, tumor location, tumor size, type of resection, pathological type, tumor depth and LNM. Data were processed using SPSS 22.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Discrete variables were analyzed using Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. Continuous variables were expressed as median (interquartile range) and analyzed using nonparametric test. Significant prognostic risk factors identified by univariate analysis were further assessed by multivariate analysis using the Cox’s proportional hazards regression model. Overall survival was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. The P value was considered to be statistically significant at 5% level.

Results

There were 949 male (78.4%) and 261 female (21.6%). The median age was 59 years (20–87). There were 107 patients in the low BMI group (8.9%), 862 patients in the normal BMI group (71.2%) and 241 patients in the high BMI group (19.95%). The median follow-up of the low, normal and high BMI group was 22.4 (1.3–66.2) months, 25.0 (1.4–73.5) months and 25.0 (1.6–74.6) months, respectively. The associations between clinicopathological characteristics and BMI were summarized in Table 1. The results showed that BMI was not associated with age, gender, tumor location, Borrmann type, differentiation status and type of resection (all P > 0.05). However, BMI was inversely associated with tumor size, tumor depth, LNM and tumor stage (all P < 0.05).
Table 1

Correlation between clinicopathological characteristics and BMI before matching

CharacteristicsLow BMI(n = 107)Normal BMI(n = 862)High BMI(n = 241)P value
Gender
 Male836771890.974
 Female2418552
Age
  ≤ 60665011340.558
  > 6041361107
Tumor location
 Upper third33300920.327
 Middle third1515531
 Lower third53349100
 Entire65818
Tumor size (cm)
  ≤ 5615741750.016
  > 54628866
Borrmann type
 I19102340.498
 II2923259
 III3730584
 IV126413
Pathological type
 Well differentiated674240.511
 Moderately differentiated2221868
 Poorly differentiated74540140
 Signet ring cell or Mucinous5309
Type of gastrectomy
 Proximal778250.594
 Distal4131697
 Total59468119
Tumor depth
 T110161520.047
 T2107130
 T33930886
 T4a4631572
 T4b271
Lymph node metastasis
 N023291990.005
 N12014149
 N22015333
 N3a2618245
 N3b189515
Tumor stage
 Ia8140470.006
 Ib35017
 IIa1010034
 IIb1912245
 IIIa2110927
 IIIb1616337
 IIIc3017834
Correlation between clinicopathological characteristics and BMI before matching To reduce bias, propensity score matching was used to match patients in the three groups. After matching, there were 104 patients in the low BMI group, 416 patients in the normal BMI group and 104 patients in the high BMI group. The clinicopathological features were comparable among the three groups after matching (Table 2, all P > 0.05).
Table 2

Correlation between clinicopathological characteristics and BMI after matching

CharacteristicsLow BMI(n = 104)Normal BMI(n = 416)High BMI(n = 104)P value
Gender
 Male82331760.353
 Female228528
Age
  ≤ 6060220620.379
  > 604419642
Tumor location
 Upper third33156370.329
 Middle third156213
 Lower third5116041
 Entire53813
Tumor size (cm)
  ≤ 560251600.818
  > 54416544
Borrmann type
 I1959110.682
 II2711032
 III3716242
 IV11357
Pathological type
 Well differentiated62340.746
 Moderately differentiated219429
 Poorly differentiated7228465
 Signet ring cell or Mucinous5156
Type of gastrectomy
 Proximal73660.816
 Distal4114838
 Total5623260
Tumor depth
 T11050120.721
 T2103514
 T33914340
 T4a4418438
 T4b140
Lymph node metastasis
 N023105220.730
 N1206119
 N2208716
 N3a2510533
 N3b165814
Tumor stage
 Ia840100.280
 Ib3246
 IIa10399
 IIb195916
 IIIa214112
 IIIb1610926
 IIIc2710425
Correlation between clinicopathological characteristics and BMI after matching The association between BMI and surgery-related parameters were shown in Table 3. The results showed that patients in the high BMI group was associated with increased blood loss and operation time, and deceased number of retrieved lymph nodes (all P < 0.05). The length of postoperative stay was comparable among the three groups (P = 0.179).
Table 3

Comparison of surgery-related parameters after matching

CharacteristicsLow BMINormal BMIHigh BMIP value
Blood loss (ml)150 (100, 200)150 (100, 200)200 (150, 350)< 0.001
Operation time (min)170 (140, 220)185 (150, 230)217.5 (175, 263.75)< 0.001
Number of retrieved lymph nodes26 (22, 33)26 (21, 32)23 (19, 27)< 0.001
Length of postoperative stay7 (6, 9)7 (6, 9)8 (6, 9)0.179
Comparison of surgery-related parameters after matching The association between BMI and postoperative complications were shown in Table 4. The results showed that patients in the low BMI group was associated with decreased rate of postoperative fever (P = 0.025). However, BMI was not associated with other complications (all P > 0.05).
Table 4

Comparison of postoperative complications after matching

ComplicationsLow BMINormal BMIHigh BMIP value
Fever874210.025
Pneumonia63280.788
Wound infection0100.778
Wound disruption0420.364
Anastomosis leakage0900.102
Abdominal bleeding1400.604
Chyle leakage2500.405
Pleural effusion11110.382
Gastric stasis0010.082
Ileus1820.794
Comparison of postoperative complications after matching The risk factors for the prognosis of gastric cancer patients were analyzed using univariate analysis and shown in Table 5. The results showed that age, BMI, tumor size, Borrmann type, pathological type, type of gastrectomy, tumor depth, LNM and tumor stage were associated with the prognosis of gastric cancer. Multivariate analysis showed that only BMI, tumor size, tumor depth and LNM were independent prognostic factors (Table 6).
Table 5

Univariate analysis of risk factors for prognosis of gastric cancer after matching

Prognostic factorsβHazard ratio (95% CI)P value
Gender−0.1270.881(0.643–1.206)0.428
Age0.3261.386(1.075–1.786)0.012
BMI−0.2560.774(0.619–0.969)0.025
Tumor location0.0561.058(0.933–1.199)0.380
Tumor size0.7692.158(1.670–2.787)< 0.001
Borrmann type0.3571.429(1.260–1.621)< 0.001
Pathological type0.4671.596(1.289–1.975)< 0.001
Type of gastrectomy0.4320.649(0.522–0.808)< 0.001
Tumor depth0.8542.348(1.929–2.858)< 0.001
Lymph node metastasis0.5911.807(1.586–2.058)< 0.001
Tumor stage1.2393.451(2.575–4.623)< 0.001
Table 6

Multivariate analysis of risk factors for prognosis of gastric cancer after matching

Prognostic factorsβHazard ratio (95% CI)P value
Age0.1981.219(0.940–1.582)0.136
BMI0.3320.717(0.570–0.903)0.005
Tumor size0.3451.412(1.077–1.851)0.013
Borrmann type0.0801.083(0.943–1.244)0.259
Pathological type0.1201.128(0.900–1.414)0.297
Type of gastrectomy−0.0650.937(0.743–1.181)0.582
Tumor depth0.5601.751(1.397–2.193)< 0.001
Lymph node metastasis0.4031.496(1.298–1.724)< 0.001
Univariate analysis of risk factors for prognosis of gastric cancer after matching Multivariate analysis of risk factors for prognosis of gastric cancer after matching The overall survival of gastric cancer patients stratified by BMI was shown in Fig. 1. The overall survival of patients with low BMI was significantly worse than patients with normal (P < 0.001) or high BMI (P < 0.001). However, the overall survival was comparable between patients with normal and high BMI (P = 0.150). Further, the overall survival of patients stratified by tumor stage were analyzed. For stage I patients, the overall survival was comparable among the three groups (P = 0.753). For stage II patients, the overall survival of patients with low BMI was significantly worse than that with normal (P = 0.032) or high BMI (P = 0.023). The overall survival of patients with normal and high BMI was comparable (P = 0.458). For stage III patients, the overall survival of patients with low BMI was significantly worse than that with normal (P < 0.001) or high BMI (P = 0.004). The overall survival of patients with normal and high BMI was comparable (P = 0.783).
Fig. 1

Overall survival of gastric cancer patients stratified by BMI before matching

Overall survival of gastric cancer patients stratified by BMI before matching The overall survival was also analyzed for patients after propensity score matching (Fig. 2). The overall survival of patients with low BMI was significantly worse than patients with normal (P = 0.001) or high BMI (P = 0.031). However, the overall survival was comparable between patients with normal and high BMI (P = 0.731). Further, the overall survival of patients stratified by tumor stage were analyzed. For stage I and II patients, the overall survival was comparable among the three groups (both P > 0.05). For stage III patients, the overall survival of patients with low BMI was significantly worse than that with normal (P = 0.003) or high BMI (P = 0.025). The overall survival of patients with normal and high BMI was comparable (P = 0.954).
Fig. 2

Overall survival of gastric cancer patients stratified by BMI after matching

Overall survival of gastric cancer patients stratified by BMI after matching

Discussion

BMI is a widely used parameter in clinical practice due to easy measurement. BMI is associated with a variety of cancer, including gastric cancer [15]. A meta-analysis has demonstrated that high BMI was associated with increased risk of gastric cardia cancer [16]. The association between BMI and clinical outcomes of gastric cancer has also been widely investigated, however, it was still under debate [10-13]. Thus, the present study aims to investigate the impact of BMI on the clinical outcomes of gastric cancer after radical gastrectomy. We found that BMI was inversely associated with tumor stage. High BMI group was associated with increased blood loss and operation time, and deceased number of retrieved lymph nodes. Low BMI group was associated with decreased rate of postoperative fever and decreased survival of patients. The association between BMI and tumor stage was inconsistent in previous reports. Kim et al. reported that low BMI was associated with more advanced tumor stage [4]. Chen et al. reported that low BMI was associated with increased rate of lymph node metastasis and advanced tumor stage, but not associated with tumor depth [11]. However, no association between BMI and tumor stage has also been reported [12, 17]. The inconsistent results may attribute to many reasons, such as inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample size, cut off value of BMI, race, etc. As gastrointestinal malignancy, gastric cancer always accompanied with severe weight loss and cachexia [18]. Thus, advanced gastric cancer may be more inclined to exist in patients with low BMI. In our present study, we also found that BMI was inversely associated with tumor depth, lymph node metastasis and tumor stage. The impact of BMI on intraoperative conditions were also widely investigated. Patients with high BMI was reported to be associated with increased blood loss [19, 20], increased operation time [17, 21] and decreased number of retrieved lymph nodes [10, 22] in most of previous reports. However, no association between BMI and intraoperative conditions has also been reported [23, 24] occasionally. Based on clinical experiences, obesity was thought to be associated with thick abdominal wall and massive adipose tissue in the abdomen, which will increase the difficulty of surgical resection [17]. Thus, the blood loss was increased and operation time was prolonged [11]. Furthermore, lymph nodes located deep in adipose tissue around major vessels were always difficult to remove in high BMI patients [10]. In our present study, we also found that high BMI was also associated with increased blood loss, operation time and decreased number of retrieved lymph nodes. No difference was found between low and normal BMI patients. The results were consistent with most of the previous reports. From the surgical point of view, high BMI patients was thought to be associated with increased postoperative complications due to the prolonged operation time and increased blood loss. This has been confirmed by most of the previous reports. Kulig et al. reported that higher BMI was associated with higher rates of intra-abdominal abscess and cardiopulmonary complications [22]. Kim et al. also reported that obese was associated with higher rate of intra-abdominal abscess, wound problems and overall complications [20]. Hirao et al. showed that overweight was an independent risk factor for surgical site infection [19]. This risk may attribute to greater wound size and decreased oxygen tension in relatively avascular adipose tissue in overweight patients [19]. In addition, high BMI was also reported to be associated with anastomotic leak [10]. Theoretically, massive abdominal adipose tissue would result in a thick mesentery and increased tension on an anastomosis, which may result in anastomotic leakage [10]. However, no association between BMI and postoperative complications was also reported [12, 17]. In our present study, we found that normal and high BMI group was associated with increased rate of postoperative fever. The inconsistence of the results may attribute to sample size, type of gastrectomy, surgical techniques and perioperative nursing and treatment. It was well known that overweight and obesity was a risk factor of death in general population [25]. However, “obesity paradox” has been proposed recently, referring to better prognosis of mildly obese patients after surgery [11]. The association between BMI and prognosis of patients after radical gastrectomy has also been widely investigated. Chen et al. reported that BMI was inversely associated with the prognosis of patients [11]. Tokunaga et al. reported that overweight patients had better prognosis after gastrectomy [26]. However, also with relatively large sample size, no association was found between BMI and prognosis of gastric cancer [10, 22, 27]. In our present study, low BMI was associated with decreased prognosis of gastric cancer. However, the prognosis was comparable between patients with normal and high BMI. It was reported that gastrectomy may result in 5%–19% body weight loss [26]. Thus, overweight patients may achieve ideal body weight years after gastrectomy, which may result in better prognosis. It was reported that cancer patients with low BMI was always accompanied by low hemoglobin and albumin levels which may due to poor nutritional status and cachexia [11]. The malnutrition in turn will impair the anti-tumor immunity of patients [28]. In the subgroup analysis in our present study, only the prognosis of patients with stage III disease was significantly influenced by BMI, which indicated that patients with normal and high BMI might be more able to bear cancer related malnutrition and stress. There were several limitations in our present study. First, it was a single center’s experience with limited sample size, which may result in bias during analysis. Multi-center study with larger sample size was needed to confirm our results. Second, we only analyzed the impact of BMI at diagnosis on the clinical outcomes of patients. The impact of body weight loss before surgery on the clinical outcomes of patients were not analyzed. Third, as there were only twenty-three obese patients (BMI ≥ 30 Kg/m2) in our present study. We only divided patients into low, normal and high BMI groups. The impact of obesity on the clinical outcomes of gastric cancer was not independently analyzed. Fourth, it was reported that visceral fat area may be superior to BMI to predict the risk of gastrectomy. With regret, visceral fat area of patients was not evaluated in our present study.

Conclusions

BMI was inversely associated with tumor size, tumor depth, LNM and tumor stage. High BMI was associated with increased blood loss and operation time, and deceased number of retrieved lymph nodes. Low BMI was associated with decreased rate of postoperative fever and decreased survival of patients.
  28 in total

1.  Implications of overweight in gastric cancer: A multicenter study in a Western patient population.

Authors:  J Kulig; M Sierzega; P Kolodziejczyk; J Dadan; M Drews; M Fraczek; A Jeziorski; M Krawczyk; T Starzynska; G Wallner
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-08-21       Impact factor: 4.424

Review 2.  Fuel feeds function: energy metabolism and the T-cell response.

Authors:  Casey J Fox; Peter S Hammerman; Craig B Thompson
Journal:  Nat Rev Immunol       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 53.106

3.  Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2010 (ver. 3).

Authors: 
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 7.370

4.  Impact of obesity on perioperative complications and long-term survival of patients with gastric cancer.

Authors:  Kai A Bickenbach; Brian Denton; Mithat Gonen; Murray F Brennan; Daniel G Coit; Vivian E Strong
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-09-14       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Body mass index and weight change in relation to triple-negative breast cancer survival.

Authors:  Ping-Ping Bao; Hui Cai; Peng Peng; Kai Gu; Yinghao Su; Xiao-Ou Shu; Ying Zheng
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 2.506

6.  Food intake after gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma: the role of a gastric reservoir.

Authors:  B Liedman; H Andersson; B Berglund; I Bosaeus; I Hugosson; L Olbe; L Lundell
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  Body mass index and risk of gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of a population with more than ten million from 24 prospective studies.

Authors:  Yi Chen; Lingxiao Liu; Xiaolin Wang; Jianhua Wang; Zhiping Yan; Jieming Cheng; Gaoquan Gong; Guoping Li
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2013-05-22       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  A high body mass index in esophageal cancer patients does not influence postoperative outcome or long-term survival.

Authors:  R L G M Blom; S M Lagarde; J H G Klinkenbijl; O R C Busch; M I van Berge Henegouwen
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-10-07       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  Preoperative Body Mass Index, Blood Albumin and Triglycerides Predict Survival for Patients with Gastric Cancer.

Authors:  Bin Zheng Liu; Lin Tao; Yun Zhao Chen; Xu Zhe Li; Yu Ling Dong; Ya Jing Ma; Shu Gang Li; Feng Li; Wen Jie Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-16       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Clinical and Oncological Value of Preoperative BMI in Gastric Cancer Patients: A Single Center Experience.

Authors:  Costantino Voglino; Giulio Di Mare; Francesco Ferrara; Lorenzo De Franco; Franco Roviello; Daniele Marrelli
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 2.260

View more
  15 in total

1.  Impact of preoperative wait time on survival in patients with clinical stage II/III gastric cancer.

Authors:  Kenichiro Furukawa; Tomoyuki Irino; Rie Makuuchi; Yusuke Koseki; Kenichi Nakamura; Yuhei Waki; Keiichi Fujiya; Hayato Omori; Yutaka Tanizawa; Etsuro Bando; Taiichi Kawamura; Masanori Terashima
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2018-12-10       Impact factor: 7.370

2.  Factors associated with technical difficulty of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer that met the expanded indication criteria: post hoc analysis of a multi-institutional prospective confirmatory trial (JCOG0607).

Authors:  Tomonori Yano; Noriaki Hasuike; Hiroyuki Ono; Narikazu Boku; Gakuto Ogawa; Tomohiro Kadota; Ichiro Oda; Hisashi Doyama; Shinichiro Hori; Hiroyasu Iishi; Akiko Takahashi; Kohei Takizawa; Manabu Muto
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2019-07-18       Impact factor: 7.370

3.  Clinical significance of nutritional risk screening for older adult patients with COVID-19.

Authors:  Gaoli Liu; Shaowen Zhang; Zhangfan Mao; Weixing Wang; Haifeng Hu
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 4.016

4.  CT-derived body composition measurements as predictors for neoadjuvant treatment tolerance and survival in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Kyle J Lafata; Mustafa R Bashir; Mariana R DeFreitas; Amadu Toronka; Marybeth A Nedrud; Sarah Cubberley; Islam H Zaki; Brandon Konkel; Hope E Uronis; Manisha Palta; Dan G Blazer
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2022-10-09

5.  Body Mass Index and Prognosis of Patients With Stage II/III Gastric Cancer After Curative Gastrectomy: Completion of Perioperative Adjuvant Chemotherapy May Be a Confounding Factor.

Authors:  Wei Peng; Jing Dai; Chao-Chan Liu; Dian Liu; Hua Xiao
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-13       Impact factor: 5.738

6.  Postoperative Fasting Blood Glucose Predicts Prognosis in Stage I-III Colorectal Cancer Patients Undergoing Resection.

Authors:  Rui Xu; Junhao You; Fang Li; Bing Yan
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 2.260

7.  Risk factors of tumor invasion and node metastasis in early gastric cancer with undifferentiated component: a multicenter retrospective study on biopsy specimens and clinical data.

Authors:  Yi Zou; Long Wu; Yubin Yang; Xin Shen; Chunpeng Zhu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-03

8.  Prognostic significance of serum inflammation indexes in different Lauren classification of gastric cancer.

Authors:  Xin Yin; Tianyi Fang; Yimin Wang; Yufei Wang; Daoxu Zhang; Chunfeng Li; Yingwei Xue
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 4.452

9.  Prediction of three lipid derivatives for postoperative gastric cancer mortality: the Fujian prospective investigation of cancer (FIESTA) study.

Authors:  Dan Hu; Feng Peng; Xiandong Lin; Gang Chen; Binying Liang; Ying Chen; Chao Li; Hejun Zhang; Guohui Fan; Guodong Xu; Yan Xia; Jinxiu Lin; Xiongwei Zheng; Wenquan Niu
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-08-06       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  Preoperative Sedentary Time Predicts Postoperative Complications in Gastrointestinal Cancer.

Authors:  Takuya Yanagisawa; Hideshi Sugiura; Noriatsu Tatematsu; Mioko Horiuchi; Saki Migitaka; Keita Itatsu
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2020-11-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.