| Literature DB >> 32689949 |
Akiko Ohno1, Jun Miyoshi2, Atsushi Kato1, Naohiko Miyamoto1, Takahito Yatagai1, Yu Hada1, Mitsunori Kusuhara1, Yoko Jimbo1, Yosuke Ida3, Kengo Tokunaga3, Susumu Okamoto3, Tadakazu Hisamatsu4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer after Helicobacter pylori (HP) eradication is a crucial clinical challenge today as HP eradication therapy is widely performed. Detecting gastric cancer after HP eradication tends to be difficult with normal white-light endoscopy. In the present study, we aimed to identify easily-evaluated endoscopic findings that indicate the presence of gastric cancer after HP eradication so that endoscopists can consider additional detailed examinations at the site.Entities:
Keywords: Atrophy; Endoscopy; Helicobacter pylori; Stomach neoplasms
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32689949 PMCID: PMC7370417 DOI: 10.1186/s12876-020-01375-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Gastroenterol ISSN: 1471-230X Impact factor: 3.067
Fig. 1Kimura-Takemoto classification. Depending on the atrophic border, it is classified into a closed type that does not exceed the cardia (C-1, 2, and 3) and an open type that extends beyond the cardia to a greater curvature (O-1, 2, and 3)
Grading Scores of Cancer in the Kyoto Classification of Gastritis
| Elements | Score | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| A: Gastric mucosal atrophy | 0 | None | C0-C1(according to Kimura-Takemoto classification) |
| 1 | Mild | C2-C3 | |
| 2 | Severe | O1-O3 | |
| IM: Intestinal metaplasia | 0 | None | None |
| 1 | Mild | Within the antrum | |
| 2 | Severe | Up to the Corpus | |
| H: Hypertrophy of gastric fold | 0 | Negative | ≦4 mm |
| 1 | Positive | >5 mm | |
| N: Nodularity | 0 | Negative | Negative |
| 1 | Positive | Positive | |
| D: Diffuse redness | 0 | None | None |
| 1 | Mild | Mild translucency of collecting venules in the body | |
| 2 | Sever | Severe translucency of collecting venules in the body |
Characteristics of Patients
| Gastric cancer (+) | Gastric cancer (−) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 43 | 119 | – |
| Sex (F/M) | 5/38 | 47/72 | 0.0006a |
| Age (years old, median, range) | 72 (58–87) | 69 (58–86) | 0.0305b |
| Duration after HP eradication (months, mean ± SEM) | 66.88 ± 7.170 | 73.79 ± 5.221 | n.s.b |
| Brinkman Index (mean ± SEM)c | 405.4 ± 89.33 | 264.2 ± 34.88 | n.s.b |
aFisher’s exact test, bMann-Whitney U test
cThe smoking history was not provided by one subject in the gastric cancer (+) group and two subjects in the gastric cancer (−) group
Fig. 2Representative early gastric cancer after HP eradication. A representative case of 25 mm 0-IIb lesion of the upper gastric body at 8 years after HP eradication is presented. The atrophy of background gastric mucosa was A2 type in Kyoto classification. The left and right panels show the same lesion with white-light endoscopy and chromo endoscopy, respectively
Univariate analyses for endoscopic findings
| Gastric cancer (+) | Gastric cancer (−) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Kyoto risk score (total) | 4.163 ± 0.105 | 2.681 ± 0.126 | < 0.0001b |
| -Atrophy | 2.000 ± 0.000 | 1.496 ± 0.048 | < 0.0001b |
| -Intestinal metaplasia | 1.814 ± 0.083 | 1.076 ± 0.086 | < 0.0001b |
| -Enlarged fold | 0.116 ± 0.049 | 0.050 ± 0.020 | 0.1626b |
| -Nodularity gastritis | 0.000 ± 0.000 | 0.008 ± 0.008 | > 0.9999b |
| -Diffuse redness | 0.233 ± 0.080 | 0.042 ± 0.018 | 0.0027b |
| Map-like redness (+/−) | 26/17 | 37/82 | 0.0010a |
The scoring data is presented as mean ± SEM
aFisher’s exact test, bMann-Whitney U test
Logistic regression analysis for endoscopic findings (forward selection based on likelihood ratio)
| Regression coefficient | Standard error | Waldχ2 value | Odds ratio | 95% CI of Odds ratio | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||||
| Atrophy | 20.737 | 5101.770 | 0.000 | 0.997 | 1,013,681,190.832 | 0.000 | |
| Diffuse redness | 1.383 | 0.655 | 4.467 | 0.035 | 3.988 | 1.106 | 14.386 |
| Constant | −41.970 | 10,203.539 | 0.000 | 0.997 | 0.000 | ||
Model χ2 test: P < 0.001
Hosmer-Lemeshow test: P = 1.000
Percentage of correct classifications: 76.5%
ROC analysis between gastric cancer and calculated probability
| ROC curve | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AUC | 95% CI | ||||
| 0.7828 | 0.7131–0.8524 | < 0.0001 | |||
| ROC sensitivity, specificity and likelihood | |||||
| Sensitivity (%) | 95% CI | Specificity (%) | 95% CI | Likelihood ratio | |
| > 0.1892 | 100.0 | 91.80–100.0% | 49.58 | 40.75–58.43% | 1.983 |
ROC receiver operating characteristic, CI confidence interval
Contingency table for gastric cancer and proposed threshold of calculated probability
| Calculated probability | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gastric cancer | (+) | 43 | 0 |
| (−) | 60 | 59 | |
Sensitivity: 100.0%
Specificity: 49.58%
Positive predictive value: 41.74%
Negative predictive value: 100.0%
Chart for calculated probability of gastric cancer
| Atrophy score | Diffuse redness score | Calculated probability |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2 | 0.906361788 |
| 2 | 1 | 0.70827069 |
| 2 | 0 | 0.378481143 |
| 1 | 2 | 9.54737E-09 |
| 1 | 1 | 2.39472E-09 |
| 1 | 0 | 6.00655E-10 |
| 0 | 2 | 9.41714E-18 |
| 0 | 1 | 2.36205E-18 |
| 0 | 0 | 5.92462E-19 |