Effectiveness of Gastric Cancer Screening on Gastric Cancer Incidence and Mortality in a Community-Based Prospective Cohort

Heewon Kim; Yunji Hwang; Hokyung Sung; Jieun Jang; Choonghyun Ahn; Sang Gyun Kim; Keun-Young Yoo; Sue K. Park

doi:10.4143/crt.2017.048

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Cancer Res Treat > Volume 50(2); 2018 > Article

Original Article Effectiveness of Gastric Cancer Screening on Gastric Cancer Incidence and Mortality in a Community-Based Prospective Cohort: Heewon Kim, MS^1,2,3, Yunji Hwang, PhD^1,2,3, Hokyung Sung, MD^1,2,3, Jieun Jang, BS^1,2,3, Choonghyun Ahn, MD^1,2,3, Sang Gyun Kim, MD, PhD⁴, Keun-Young Yoo, MD, PhD^2,5, Sue K. Park, MD, MPH, PhD^1,2,3,; Cancer Research and Treatment : Official Journal of Korean Cancer Association 2018;50(2):582-589.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2017.048
Published online: June 9, 2017

¹Department of Biomedical Science, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

²Department of Preventive Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

³Cancer Research Center, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea

⁴Department of Internal Medicine and Liver Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

⁵The Armed Forces Capital Hospital, Seongnam, Korea

Correspondence: Sue K. Park, MD, MPH, PhD Department of Preventive Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 03080, Korea
Tel: 82-2-740-8338 Fax: 82-2-747-4830 E-mail: suepark@snu.ac.kr

• Received: January 25, 2017 • Accepted: June 5, 2017

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

11,654 Views
440 Download
71 Web of Science
71 Crossref
80 Scopus

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract

Purpose
This study was performed to investigate the effectiveness of gastric cancer (GC) screening methods in a community-based prospective cohort of the Korean Multi-center Cancer Cohort (KMCC) with over a 10-year follow-up.
Materials and Methods
A total 10,909 and 4,773 subjects from the KMCC with information on gastroendoscopy (GE) and upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) were included in this study. Cox proportional hazard model adjusted for age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection, cigarette smoking, and alcohol drinking was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
Results
The GE screened subjects had almost half the risk of GC-specific death than that of unscreened subjects (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.94). Among the GC patients, GE screenees had a 2.24-fold higher survival rate than that of the non-screenees (95% CI, 1.61 to 3.11). In particular, GE screenees who underwent two or more screening episodes had a higher survival rate than that of the non-screenees (HR, 13.11; 95% CI, 7.38 to 23.30). The effectiveness of GE screening on reduced GC mortality and increased survival rate of GC patients was better in elderly subjects (≥ 65 years old) (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.95 and HR, 8.84; 95% CI, 3.63 to 21.57, respectively) than that in younger subjects (< 65 years old) (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.34 to 1.29 and HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.24 to 2.68, respectively). In contrast, UGIS screening had no significant relation to GC mortality and survival.
Conclusion
The findings of this study suggest that a decreased GC-specific mortality and improved survival rate in GC patients can be achieved through GE screening.
Key words: Stomach neoplasms, Cohort studies, Mortality, Gastrointestinal endoscopy, Gastroscopy

Introduction

Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth most common cancer, which is a major disease burden worldwide in recent years [1]. In Korea, GC is the second most common cancer after thyroid cancer, and GC has the third highest cancer death rate among all cancers [2]. The Korean government provides the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP), which is a cancer screening program for five common cancers (i.e., stomach, liver, colorectal, breast, and cervix uteri) in the general population [3]. Under the NCSP, a GC screening program involving a biennial gastroendoscopy (GE) or upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) screening was implemented in 2002 for people aged 40 years and older [4]. The lifetime GC screening rate under the NCSP was 83.4%, and the GC screening rate based on the recommendation was 76.7% in 2014 [5]. In 2013, the participation rates in the NCSP for GC was 42.4% [5]. Among subjects who received GC screening, 72.6% and 28.4% underwent GE and UGIS screening, respectively, as a primary screening tool within the total Korean population [4].

Prior studies have evaluated the effects of GC screening among GC patients [6,7]. Those studies reported a higher likelihood of GC diagnoses in screenees than in non-screenees [6] and a relationship between the history of GC screening and advanced GC [7]. A case-control study also reported that GC patients admitted through a GE screening center had higher survival probability relative to those who were admitted through an outpatient clinic [8]. A retrospective cohort study using the NCSP data indicated that GE screening had higher sensitivity than that of UGIS screening for GC diagnosis [9]. However, that study was not focused on the associations between the GC screening methods and GC incidence, mortality, and survival. Moreover, studies on assessing the effectiveness of GC screening tools were rarely based on a population-based prospective cohort study.

Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of GC screening for assessing the GC incidence, GC-specific death, and GC survival probability in a community-based prospective cohort. Additionally, this study also evaluated the relative effectiveness of the two types of GC screening methods (GE and UGIS) used in Korea.

Materials and Methods

1. Study design and study population

The Korean Multi-center Cancer Cohort (KMCC) is a community-based prospective cohort with subjects from four areas of Korea (Haman, Chungju, Uljin, and Youngil). The KMCC data used in this study were collected from 1993 to 2004. Information on lifestyle factors and environmental factors were obtained from a questionnaire by well-trained interviewers. Anthropometric indices such as height, weight, waist circumference and hip circumference were also measured. The KMCC is explained in more detail in a previous report [10]. A total of 10,909 and 4,773 subjects had survey records on GE and/or UGIS screening information (screened and unscreened). The GE and UGIS screening status was classified into two groups (screened and unscreened) for each screening method. Each of the screened groups was further divided into three subgroups: low-frequency (one screening episode), high-frequency (two or more screening episodes) screening groups and unknown or missing group. There were 1,336 and 30 subjects with an unknown frequency for GE and UGIS screening, even though they had undergone screening.

The Institutional Review Boards of Seoul National University Hospital (H-0110-084-002) and the National Cancer Center of Korea approved this KMCC-based study protocol (C-1310-082-528).

2. Outcome and follow-up

The main outcomes were GC incidence and GC-specific death. GC survival rate in post-diagnosis GC patients was an additional outcome variable. The incidences of GC (International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, third edition [ICD-O-3]: C16) were ascertained by linking the KMCC data to the National Cancer Registry until December 31, 2013, and GC-specific deaths (International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition [ICD10]: C16) were ascertained by linking the Nationwide Death Certificate databases until December 31, 2014.

3. Assessment of exposure

Information on screening was obtained from a self-reported questionnaire at baseline. Data on age (age at baseline), sex (men and women), cigarette smoking (never smoker, former smokers, and current smokers), and alcohol consumption (never drinker, former drinker, and current drinker) was obtained from the KMCC. Body mass index (BMI, kg/m²) was calculated from the height and weight measured directly during the physical examination at base line. To determine Helicobacter pylori infection (positive and negative), immunoblot assay (Helico Blot 2.1, MP Biomedicals Asia Pacific, Singapore) was done with plasma samples collected at baseline. Our cohort only had collected blood and urine samples at baseline; thus, we could not do the Campylobacter-like organism test and urea breathe test which requires a biopsy and breathe sample. Nevertheless, this assay has several strengths. It detects the H. pylori IgG antibody which decreases slowly, and it indicates not only current infection but also past infection [11].

4. Statistical analysis

Comparison of screened and unscreened group characteristics was done by Student’s t test for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with the Cox proportional hazard model after adjusting for age, sex, H. pylori infection (yes vs. no), cigarette smoking (yes vs. no), and alcohol consumption status (yes vs. no). P for trend were estimated by assigning scores for the categories of screening episodes from 1 for the lowest screening episode to 2 for the highest screening episode as a continuous variable. We conducted subgroup analysis with the frequencies of screening as the once group and the twice or more group. In addition, stratified analysis was also done by age (< 65 and ≥ 65 years old) and gastritis history (no and yes). To assess the combined or single effect by the two screening methods, we did a combination analysis between the groups stratified with various combinations according to the screening modalities (never screened, only screened by GE, only screened by UGIS, and screened by both GE and UGIS). p-values two sided and less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. We performed all statistical analyses with SAS ver. 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

Results

Among the 10,909 subjects who had records on GE screening, there were 6,553 (60.1%) who underwent GE screening and 4,356 (39.9%) who did not undergo GE screening. Similarly, of the 4,773 subjects who had records on UGIS screening, there were 2,758 (57.8%) who underwent UGIS screening and 2,015 (42.2%) who did not undergo UGIS screening (Table 1).

Compared to the unscreened GE group, the GE screened group had more males and older subjects and also was more likely to have a higher BMI (p < 0.001) and higher education levels (p < 0.001) and had smokers (former and current smoking) (p < 0.001) and alcohol drinkers (former and current drinking) (p=0.001). Within the UGIS group, the screenees consisted more of females and older subjects compared to the non-screenees (p < 0.001) and were more likely to have a lower BMI (p < 0.001). However, the other characteristics were not significantly different between the screened and unscreened UGIS groups (Table 1).

In the analysis for GE screening, 328 subjects were diagnosed with newly developed GC cases. Of those new cases in 130,666 person years, 107 patients died due to GC in 139,123 person years; 43 patients died due to causes other than GC, and 178 survived in 2,433 person years. In the UGIS screening analysis, there were 103 new GC cases diagnosed in 44,258 person years. Of those new cases, 22 patients died due to GC in 30,393 person years; 15 patients died due to other causes, and 66 survived in 571 person years.

The subjects in the GE screening group had a 0.87-fold reduced risk for overall death (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.95). Moreover, GE screenees had a much more reduced risk for GC-specific death (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.94) relative to the GE nonscreenees. Among the patients diagnosed with GC, the GE screened subjects had a higher survival rate than that of the unscreened subjects (HR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.61 to 3.11). However, a significant difference was not found in the GC incidence between the screened and unscreened groups (Table 2).

GE screenees had a much more increased risk of GC incidence (screened once: HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.45 to 3.31; screened more than two times: HR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.28; p-trend < 0.001). The unknown or missing frequency of GE screening episodes prior to cohort enrollment was significantly associated with a lower risk of GC-specific death among the total participants (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.96) and that was significantly associated with an improved survival rate among the GC patients (p-trend < 0.001). Compared to non-screenees, subjects with one GE screening episode had a 7.66-fold higher survivor rate (95% CI, 4.26 to 13.77), and those with two or more screening episodes had a much higher survivor rate (HR, 13.11; 95% CI, 7.38 to 23.30) (Table 3).

The effectiveness of the GE screening in terms of the survival rate, which is the improvement of survival in the screenees compared to the non-screenees, was better in GC patients aged 65 years and older (HR, 8.84; 95% CI, 3.63 to 21.57) than in GC patients aged less than 65 years (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.24 to 2.68) (Table 4). However, we could not find difference in the association between screening and GC survival according to gastritis history (Table 5).

In the analysis of the UGIS screening, there were no significant differences in the risk of GC incidence, GC-specific deaths, and survival rate between the screened and unscreened UGIS groups or between those screened once and those screened two or more times versus unscreened subjects (Tables 2 and 3). In addition, we did not observe any significant result from the combination analysis of the GC screening methods (S1 Table).

Discussion

The results suggest that GE screening was related to a decreased risk of GC-specific death based on the data from the community-based KMCC population over a minimum 10-year follow-up period. Compared to the unscreened group, the GE screening group had a higher survival rate in GC-diagnosed patients. Furthermore, the effectiveness of GE screening on improved survival in GC patients was more prominent in the older age group (age 65 years and older) than in the younger age group (aged less than 65 years).

To our knowledge, there is limited evidence based on randomized trial studies or large-scale cohort studies on the relationship of GC-specific death with GE or UGIE. Most previous studies were based on a case control study [12-15] or retrospective cohort study [16-18]. Among those studies, five Japanese studies [12-14,16,18] have shown a lower risk of GC death associated with GC screening, which is a beneficial effect of the screening. However, two studies based on Western study populations did not show a significant association [15,17]. This inconsistency may be due to the lower GC incidences and GC-related mortality rates in the Venezuelan and U.S. study populations than those in the East Asian (Korea and Japan) study populations [1]. It may be caused by differences in the target disease in some of the studies (i.e., gastric cardia cancer vs. gastric cancer) [17] or by the absence of national guidelines or recommendations for GC screening in most countries other than Korea and Japan [19].

S2 Table shows a summary of the Japanese cohort studies which evaluated GC mortality in screened versus unscreened subjects by the modality [18,20-23]. Notably, the Japan Public Health Center-based prospective study (JPHC study) is comparable to our study [22]. Among the 42,150 subjects, the JPHC study results showed a 48% lower GC mortality among those who underwent photofluorography screening compared to the unscreened subjects [22]. It was similar to our results (51% reduction in GC mortality) despite of the use of different GC screening methods (i.e., gastric endoscopy and photofluorography, respectively).

Although our results did not show significant values in the analysis regarding UGIS, two Japanese studies suggested that UGIS also has a preventive effect for GC mortality [22,23]. The difference in the observed effects of UGIS as GC screening in Japan and Korea may be due to differences in the GC screening guidelines and UGIS quality control (QC) programs of the two countries [24,25]. In Korea, the NCSP recommends biennial GE or UGIS screening as the first-line screening method for GC detection in people aged 40 years and older, while in Japan, annual photofluorography is recommended as the first-line screening method for GC detection in people in the same age group [24]. In addition, in 2007, Japan established municipal government programs to evaluate screening facilities and established a checklist for GC screening QC [26]. There have also been efforts to improve and standardize the quality of cancer screening in Korea. An evaluation of the quality of Korean and Japanese UGIS screening images revealed a higher QC score in Korea than in Japan (QC score, 73.31 in Korea; QC score, 58 in Japan) [27].

In the JPHC study [22], the overall GC incidence in the photoﬂuorography screened population was not significantly different from that in the unscreened population (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.25), which is consistent with our result. In our study, an increase in GE screening frequency was not associated with an increase in GC incidence; however, in another cohort study in Korea, repeated GE screening was associated with a lower GC incidence compared to less frequent screening [28]. That study included a highly self-motivated population in which 99.6% (n=18,414) of the subjects voluntarily underwent GE screening, which may have led to its results being different from those in our study.

Several studies have examined the effectiveness of GC screening for increasing GC survival among GC patients [7,8,29]. However, based on study designs, only the results in one Japanese retrospective study, published in 2001, are directly comparable to the screened and unscreened groups in our study [29]. A significant beneficial effect associated with undergoing endoscopic examination within 2 years of GC diagnosis on GC survival was reported in the Japanese study (p < 0.01) [29] and is consistent with the effect detected in our study. The higher GC survival probability in GC patients who underwent prior screening is presumably due to the ability of such screening to detect early-stage or localized GC. Our findings are consistent with prior studies performed in Japan and Korea [6,7,22].

Age stratified analyses were done in two previous studies in Japan [13,22], and contradictory results were reported according to the screening modality. In a Japanese population-based case-control study [13], endoscopic screening in an older group led to a greater reduction in GC mortality reduction than that in a younger group (odds ratio [OR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.44 for patients aged 40-69 years; OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.95 for patients aged 70-79 years). Our finding of an association between GE screening and a lower GC mortality is similar to the results of the Japanese study, even though the two age strata in our study (age less than 65 years and age 65 years and older) were different from those in the Japanese study. In contrast, a study reporting on the effectiveness of photofluorography-based UGIS screening showed that the younger group had a lower risk of death from GC compared to the older group (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.72 for patients aged 40-49 years; OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.88 for patients aged 50-59 years) [22]. Inconsistency among the results across these studies may be due to the use of different screening modalities (e.g., UGIS with photofluorography vs. endoscopy) and/or to differences in study populations (e.g., different age ranges, 40-79 years old vs. 50-69 years old).

According to previous studies, GE screening, but not UGIS screening, was beneficial for improving GC detection sensitivity [9] and diagnosis of localized and early-stage GC [6,16,25]. The results in these prior studies indirectly support our results, although the earlier results were not directly compared with our finding that GE had an effect on reduced death and increased survival; however, we did not observe any significant results in the UGIS analysis. Because of a relatively small sample size for UGIS and GC-specific death, the result must be interpreted cautiously.

In the combined analysis, we did not observe any significant association between the combined groups and GC-specific death. However, this result could be because only a few number of subjects had information on both screening methods.

This study has several limitations. First, this study may include a misclassification bias. Our study population includes individuals with differences between their GC diagnosis date in their medical records and the actual GC onset date. Second, symptomatic individuals were included in the study population. Third, we were unable to stratify our subjects by GC stage or histological subtype because our data source did not contain that information. Finally, we could not consider the duration of the screening interval for the screened groups. The survey questionnaire assessed two main factors: the experience of GC screening and its frequency. Because of the absence of the screening interval data, we only assessed the effect of the GE screening using frequency.

In conclusion, our community-based prospective cohort study in Korea, a country with a high GC incidence and mortality, suggests that GE screening has a significant effect on lowering GC-specific mortality. Moreover, GE screening improved the GC survival rate in GC patients, in particular, those aged 65 years and older.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Supplementary materials are available at Cancer Research and Treatment website (http://www.e-crt.org).

crt-2017-048-suppl1.pdf

crt-2017-048-suppl2.pdf

NOTES

Conflict of interest relevant to this article was not reported.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) grant funded by the Korea government(MSIP) (No. NRF-2016R1A2B4014552); the Education and Research Encouragement Fund of Seoul National University Hospital; and the Brain Korea 21 PLUS Program.

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of screenees and non-screenees by GE or UGIS screening

Characteristic	GE screening			UGIS screening
Characteristic	Unscreened (n=6,553)	Screened (n=4,356)	p-value^a)	Unscreened (n=2,758)	Screened (n= 2,015)	p-value^a)
Proportion in total subjects (%)	60.1	39.9		57.8	42.2
Age (yr)	57.3±11.7	58.0±10.3	< 0.001	57.5±12.7	58.9±10.2	< 0.001
Sex
Male	2,564 (39.1)	1,803 (41.4)	0.02	1,076 (39.0)	778 (38.6)	0.78
Female	3,989 (60.9)	2,553 (58.6)		1,682 (61.0)	1,237 (61.4)
Body mass index (kg/m²)
< 25	3,856 (58.9)	2,377 (54.6)	< 0.001	1,486 (53.9)	1,002 (49.7)	< 0.001
≥ 25	1,973 (30.1)	1,237 (28.4)		995 (36.1)	566 (28.1)
Missing	724 (11.1)	742 (17.0)		277 (10.0)	447 (22.2)
Education (schooling year)
< 12	5,996 (91.5)	3,774 (86.6)	< 0.001	2,219 (80.5)	1,633 (81.0)	0.83
≥ 12	534 (8.2)	575 (13.2)		532 (19.3)	376 (18.7)
Missing	23 (0.4)	7 (0.2)		7 (0.3)	6 (0.3)
Smoking status
Never	4,168 (63.6)	2,693 (61.8)	< 0.001	1,791 (64.9)	1,277 (63.4)	0.22
Former	621 (9.5)	634 (14.6)		403 (14.6)	334 (16.6)
Current	1,739 (26.5)	1,014 (23.3)		554 (20.1)	393 (19.5)
Missing	25 (0.4)	15 (0.3)		10 (0.4)	11 (0.6)
Alcohol drinking status
Never	3,838 (58.6)	2,447 (56.2)	0.001	1,522 (55.2)	1,130 (56.1)	0.13
Former	327 (5.0)	284 (6.5)		194 (7.0)	108 (5.4)
Current	2,353 (35.9)	1,592 (36.6)		1,014 (36.8)	754 (37.4)
Missing	35 (0.5)	33 (0.8)		28 (1.0)	23 (1.1)

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%) unless otherwise indicated. GE, gastroendoscopy; UGIS, upper gastrointestinal series.

^a) Continuous variables were analyzed using the Student’s t test, categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test.

Table 2.

Risk of GC incidence, GC-specific death and overall survival

	Gastroendoscopic screening			Upper gastrointestinal tract series
	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)
General population
GC incidence
Never screened	84,030	191	1.00	26,036	53	1.00
Ever screened	46,636	137	1.21 (0.94-1.54)	18,222	50	0.83 (0.52-1.33)
Overall deaths
Never screened	89,172	1,503	1.00	28,484	353	1.00
Ever screened	50,626	682	0.87 (0.79-0.95)	20,266	198	0.84 (0.70-1.00)
GC-specific death
Never screened	88,929	82	1.00	28,392	13	1.00
Ever screened	50,194	25	0.58 (0.36-0.94)	20,001	9	0.91 (0.36-2.33)
Gastric cancer patients
Overall survivor rate
Never screened	1,640	91	1.00	354	34	1.00
Ever screened	793	87	2.24 (1.61-3.11)	217	32	1.36 (0.76-2.45)

GC, gastric cancer; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

^a) Adjusted age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection (positive vs. negative), cigarette smoking (yes vs. no), and alcohol consumption (yes vs. no).

Table 3.

Risk of GC incidence, GC-specific death and overall survival by screening frequency

	Gastroendoscopic screening			Upper gastrointestinal tract series
	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)
General population
GC incidence
Never screened	84,013	191	1.00	26,036	53	1.00
Screened once	14,278	32	2.19 (1.45-3.31)	9,992	18	0.92 (0.50-1.67)
More than two times	13,037	46	2.06 (1.30-3.28)	7,950	32	0.77 (0.42-1.43)
Unknown or missing^b)	19,320	59	0.83 (0.60-1.15)	281	0	NA
p-trend			< 0.001			0.35
GC-specific death
Never screened	88,911	82	1.00	28,392	13	1.00
Screened once	15,610	6	0.78 (0.33-1.82)	10,965	3	0.94 (0.26-3.43)
More than two times	14,324	6	0.59 (0.21-1.66)	8,731	6	0.92 (0.29-2.86)
Unknown or missing^b)	20,260	13	0.52 (0.28-0.96)	305	0	NA
p-trend			0.25			0.83
Gastric cancer patients
Overall survivor rate
Never screened	1,640	91	1.00	354	34	1.00
Screened once	224	20	7.66 (4.26-13.77)	119	14	1.22 (0.59-2.51)
More than two times	209	34	13.11 (7.38-23.30)	98	18	1.56 (0.74-3.28)
Unknown or missing^b)	360	33	0.94 (0.59-1.49)	0	0	NA
p-trend			< 0.001			0.24

GC, gastric cancer; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; NA, not applicable.

^a) Adjusted age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection (positive vs. negative), cigarette smoking (yes vs. no), and alcohol consumption (yes vs. no),

^b) Unknown or missing frequency.

Table 4.

Risk of GC-specific death and overall survival by age

	Age < 65 yr			Age ≥ 65 yr
	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)
GC-specific death
Never screened	67,595	36	1.00	21,334	46	1.00
Ever screened	37,271	14	0.66 (0.34-1.29)	12,923	11	0.47 (0.24-0.95)
Survival rate in GC patients
Never screened	1,112	73	1.00	528	18	1.00
Ever screened	583	65	1.83 (1.24-2.68)	210	22	8.84 (3.63-21.57)

GC, gastric cancer; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

^a) Adjusted age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection (positive vs. negative), cigarette smoking (yes vs. no), and alcohol consumption (yes vs. no).

Table 5.

Risk of GC-specific death and overall survival by history of gastritis

	No gastritis			Gastritis
	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)
GC-specific death
Never screened	79,782	73	1.00	6,624	8	1.00
Ever screened	29,944	21	0.77 (0.46-1.29)	18,966	4	0.18 (0.04-0.89)
Survival rate in GC patients
Never screened	1,471	81	1.00	111	7	1.00
Ever screened	538	56	2.12 (1.42-3.15)	226	29	2.11 (0.79-5.64)

GC, gastric cancer; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

^a) Adjusted age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection (positive vs. negative), cigarette smoking (yes vs. no), and alcohol consumption (yes vs. no).

REFERENCES

1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:E359–86. Article PubMed
2. Jung KW, Won YJ, Oh CM, Kong HJ, Cho H, Lee DH, et al. Prediction of cancer incidence and mortality in Korea, 2015. Cancer Res Treat. 2015;47:142–8. Article PubMed PMC PDF
3. Yoo KY. Cancer control activities in the Republic of Korea. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2008;38:327–33. Article PubMed PDF
4. Lee S, Jun JK, Suh M, Park B, Noh DK, Jung KW, et al. Gastric cancer screening uptake trends in Korea: results for the National Cancer Screening Program from 2002 to 2011: a prospective cross-sectional study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94:e533Article PubMed PMC
5. National Cancer Center. Cancer Facts & Figures 2015 [Internet]. Sejong: Minister for Health and Welfare; 2015. [cited 2015 Jun 10]. Available from: https://www.ncc.re.kr/main.ncc?uri=english/sub04_FactsandFigures
6. Choi KS, Jun JK, Suh M, Park B, Noh DK, Song SH, et al. Effect of endoscopy screening on stage at gastric cancer diagnosis: results of the National Cancer Screening Programme in Korea. Br J Cancer. 2015;112:608–12. Article PubMed PMC PDF
7. Lee H, Min BH, Lee JH, Son HJ, Kim JJ, Rhee JC, et al. Survival outcome associated with the screening interval for gastric cancer in Korea. Digestion. 2011;84:142–8. Article PubMed
8. Gong EJ, Ahn JY, Jung HY, Lim H, Choi KS, Lee JH, et al. Risk factors and clinical outcomes of gastric cancer identified by screening endoscopy: a case-control study. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;29:301–9. Article PubMed
9. Choi KS, Jun JK, Park EC, Park S, Jung KW, Han MA, et al. Performance of different gastric cancer screening methods in Korea: a population-based study. PLoS One. 2012;7:e50041Article PubMed PMC
10. Yoo KY, Shin HR, Chang SH, Lee KS, Park SK, Kang D, et al. Korean multi-center cancer cohort study including a biological materials bank (KMCC-I). Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2002;3:85–92. PubMed
11. Lu CY, Kuo CH, Lo YC, Chuang HY, Yang YC, Wu IC, et al. The best method of detecting prior Helicobacter pylori infection. World J Gastroenterol. 2005;11:5672–6. Article PubMed PMC
12. Matsumoto S, Yoshida Y. Efficacy of endoscopic screening in an isolated island: a case-control study. Indian J Gastroenterol. 2014;33:46–9. Article PubMed
13. Hamashima C, Ogoshi K, Okamoto M, Shabana M, Kishimoto T, Fukao A. A community-based, case-control study evaluating mortality reduction from gastric cancer by endoscopic screening in Japan. PLoS One. 2013;8:e79088Article PubMed PMC
14. Fukao A, Tsubono Y, Tsuji I, HIsamichi S, Sugahara N, Takano A. The evaluation of screening for gastric cancer in Miyagi Prefecture, Japan: a population-based case-control study. Int J Cancer. 1995;60:45–8. Article PubMed
15. Pisani P, Oliver WE, Parkin DM, Alvarez N, Vivas J. Case-control study of gastric cancer screening in Venezuela. Br J Cancer. 1994;69:1102–5. Article PubMed PMC PDF
16. Matsumoto S, Ishikawa S, Yoshida Y. Reduction of gastric cancer mortality by endoscopic and radiographic screening in an isolated island: a retrospective cohort study. Aust J Rural Health. 2013;21:319–24. Article PubMed
17. Cooper GS, Yuan Z, Chak A, Rimm AA. Association of prediagnosis endoscopy with stage and survival in adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastric cardia. Cancer. 2002;95:32–8. Article PubMed
18. Hosokawa O, Miyanaga T, Kaizaki Y, Hattori M, Dohden K, Ohta K, et al. Decreased death from gastric cancer by endoscopic screening: association with a population-based cancer registry. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2008;43:1112–5. Article PubMed
19. Dan YY, So JB, Yeoh KG. Endoscopic screening for gastric cancer. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:709–16. Article PubMed
20. Inaba S, Hirayama H, Nagata C, Kurisu Y, Takatsuka N, Kawakami N, et al. Evaluation of a screening program on reduction of gastric cancer mortality in Japan: preliminary results from a cohort study. Prev Med. 1999;29:102–6. Article PubMed
21. Kaneko S, Tamakoshi A, Ohno Y, Mizoue T, Yoshimura T; JACC Study Group. Menstrual and reproductive factors and the mortality risk of gastric cancer in Japanese menopausal females. Cancer Causes Control. 2003;14:53–9. Article PubMed
22. Lee KJ, Inoue M, Otani T, Iwasaki M, Sasazuki S, Tsugane S, et al. Gastric cancer screening and subsequent risk of gastric cancer: a large-scale population-based cohort study, with a 13-year follow-up in Japan. Int J Cancer. 2006;118:2315–21. Article PubMed
23. Miyamoto A, Kuriyama S, Nishino Y, Tsubono Y, Nakaya N, Ohmori K, et al. Lower risk of death from gastric cancer among participants of gastric cancer screening in Japan: a population-based cohort study. Prev Med. 2007;44:12–9. Article PubMed
24. Hamashima C, Shibuya D, Yamazaki H, Inoue K, Fukao A, Saito H, et al. The Japanese guidelines for gastric cancer screening. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2008;38:259–67. Article PubMed PDF
25. Tashiro A, Sano M, Kinameri K, Fujita K, Takeuchi Y. Comparing mass screening techniques for gastric cancer in Japan. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12:4873–4. PubMed PMC
26. Higashi T, Machii R, Aoki A, Hamashima C, Saito H. Evaluation and revision of checklists for screening facilities and municipal governmental programs for gastric cancer and colorectal cancer screening in Japan. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2010;40:1021–30. Article PubMed PDF
27. Oh HK, Kim JM, Kim CG, Park YS, Seon JR, Choi IS. Quality control of upper gastrointestinal seriese (UGIS) by the Image Quality Evaluation Table of Korea and Japan. J Radiol Sci Technol. 2011;34:277–85.
28. Nam SY, Choi IJ, Park KW, Kim CG, Lee JY, Kook MC, et al. Effect of repeated endoscopic screening on the incidence and treatment of gastric cancer in health screenees. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;21:855–60. Article PubMed
29. Mori Y, Arita T, Shimoda K, Yasuda K, Yoshida T, Kitano S. Effect of periodic endoscopy for gastric cancer on early detection and improvement of survival. Gastric Cancer. 2001;4:132–6. Article PubMed

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Sedated and unsedated gastroscopy has no influence on the outcomes of patients with gastric cancer: a retrospective study
Chengke Yin, Yiwu Sun, Jie Liang, Xin Sui, Zhaoyi He, Ailing Song, Wenjia Xu, Lei Zhang, Yufei Sun, Jingshun Zhao, Fei Han
BMC Cancer.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Assessing cross-country inequalities in global burden of gastrointestinal cancers: slope and concentration index approach
Haoyun Zhou, Yongbo Wang, Fang Wang, Runtang Meng, Yong Yu, Su Han, Yu Zhang, Yu Wu, Xiaoxue Liu
Discover Oncology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
RORα inhibits proliferation and chemoresistance through AKR1A1-induced glucose and lipid reprogramming in gastric cancer
Xiaoshan Wang, Mengding Chen, Yuwei Wu, Feixu Chen, Tong Shen, Zhengguang Wang
Cellular Signalling.2025; 131: 111741. CrossRef
The artificial intelligence revolution in gastric cancer management: clinical applications
Runze Li, Jingfan Li, Yuman Wang, Xiaoyu Liu, Weichao Xu, Runxue Sun, Binqing Xue, Xinqian Zhang, Yikun Ai, Yanru Du, Jianming Jiang
Cancer Cell International.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
PET/CT with 68Ga-FAPI and 18F-FDG in the Detection of Metastases in Regional Lymph Nodes in Gastric Cancer
E. V. Belkin, P. E. Tulin, O. B. Abu-Khaydar, I. A. Skripachev, A. V. Filimonov
Journal of oncology: diagnostic radiology and radiotherapy.2025; 8(1): 29. CrossRef
Inhibition of TAF1B impairs ribosome biosynthesis and suppresses cell proliferation in stomach adenocarcinoma through promoting c-MYC mRNA degradation
Hang-fei Chen, Zhang-ping Li, Qi Wu, Chun Yu, Jing-Yi Yan, Yong-feng Bai, Sheng-mei Zhu, Mao-xiang Qian, Ming Liu, Li-feng Xu, Zheng Peng, Feng Zhang
Heliyon.2024; 10(1): e23167. CrossRef
Cumulative exposure to impaired fasting glucose and gastrointestinal cancer risk: A nationwide cohort study
Byeong Yun Ahn, Bokyung Kim, Sanghyun Park, Sang Gyun Kim, Kyungdo Han, Soo‐Jeong Cho
Cancer.2024; 130(10): 1807. CrossRef
Gastric cancer screening in Western countries: A call to action
Fabio Farinati, Filippo Pelizzaro
Digestive and Liver Disease.2024; 56(10): 1653. CrossRef
The Role of Screening and Early Detection in Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers
Jin Woo Yoo, Monika Laszkowska, Robin B. Mendelsohn
Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America.2024; 38(3): 693. CrossRef
Evaluation of the value of combined detection of tumor markers CA724, carcinoembryonic antigen, CA242, and CA19-9 in gastric cancer
Chong-Mei Zhou, Shao-Hua Zhao
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology.2024; 16(5): 1737. CrossRef
Global incidence and mortality trends of gastric cancer and predicted mortality of gastric cancer by 2035
Ju-Li Lin, Jian-Xian Lin, Guang-Tan Lin, Chang-Ming Huang, Chao-Hui Zheng, Jian-Wei Xie, Jia-bin Wang, Jun Lu, Qi-Yue Chen, Ping Li
BMC Public Health.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Gastric intestinal metaplasia regression in United States population: A retrospective longitudinal study
Akram I Ahmed, Ahmed El Sabagh, Claire Caplan, Arielle Lee, Won K Cho
JGH Open.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Performance of the National Cancer Screening Program for Gastric Cancer in Korea
Young-Il Kim
The Korean Journal of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research.2024; 24(3): 231. CrossRef
MicroRNA-155 and its exosomal form: Small pieces in the gastrointestinal cancers puzzle
Jinbao Guo, Li Zhong, Mohammad Reza Momeni
Cell Biology and Toxicology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Clinicopathological and prognostic significance of TIMP1 expression in gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Mingcan Zheng, Puxu Wang, Yuhang Wang, Zirui Jia, Jiacheng Gao, Xiaodong Tan, Hailong Chen, Guo Zu
Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy.2024; 24(11): 1169. CrossRef
Fecal Immunochemical Test and Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen Co-Testing
M. Constanza Camargo
JAMA.2024; 332(19): 1621. CrossRef
Knowledge and practice of early gastric cancer screening among adults aged ≥ 45 years in China: a cross-sectional study
Xiaoci He, Wei Qi, Qian Wang, Shuping Zhao
BMC Public Health.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Inadequate gastric preparation and its associated factors for magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy
Qing-Zhou Kong, Cheng Peng, Zhen Li, Bao-Ling Tian, Yue-Yue Li, Fei-Xue Chen, Xiu-Li Zuo, Yan-Qing Li
Frontiers in Pharmacology.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Clinicopathologic significance of Her-2 and P53 expressions in gastric cancer
Xiaoyu Zhang, Mingchuan Wang, Yizhuo Wang, Xianbin Cheng, Yang Jiang, Huijie Xiao
Asian Journal of Surgery.2023; 46(1): 526. CrossRef
Trend of gastric cancer incidence and death rate in adolescents and young adults: A retrospective cohort study based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database
Jie Wen, Huiqin Shen
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2023; 38(3): 393. CrossRef
Metachronous gastric neoplasm beyond 5 years after endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer
Eunwoo Lee, Sang Gyun Kim, Bokyung Kim, Jue Lie Kim, Jung Kim, Hyunsoo Chung, Soo-Jeong Cho
Surgical Endoscopy.2023; 37(5): 3901. CrossRef
Gastric cancer clinical characteristics and their altered trends in South China: An epidemiological study with 2,800 cases spanning 26 years
Hongfa Wei, Xiao-Yong Zhan, Xianying Liao, Wenchao Li, Hui Chen, Cuncan Deng, Xinghan Jin, Zhangsen Huang, Mo Yang, Changhua Zhang, Yulong He
Frontiers in Oncology.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Controlling Gastric Cancer in a World of Heterogeneous Risk
Robert J. Huang, Monika Laszkowska, Haejin In, Joo Ha Hwang, Meira Epplein
Gastroenterology.2023; 164(5): 736. CrossRef
Willingness to Undergo Gastroscopy for Early Gastric Cancer Screening and Its Associated Factors During the COVID-19 Pandemic – A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study in China
Kejia Ma, Xuejie Chen, Xin Xiang, Xueyi Mao, Ningxin Zhu, Tianyu Wang, Shuyu Ye, Xiaoyan Wang, Minzi Deng
Patient Preference and Adherence.2023; Volume 17: 505. CrossRef
Radiographic and endoscopic screening to reduce gastric cancer mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Masaya Hibino, Chisato Hamashima, Mitsunaga Iwata, Teruhiko Terasawa
The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific.2023; 35: 100741. CrossRef
Screening behaviors and related factors among the first-degree relatives of Chinese patients with gastric cancer
Min Zhao, Hui Li, Hui Ren, Jie Zhang, Hong Yang, Yuhan Lu
Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing.2023; 10(5): 100220. CrossRef
ALDOC regulated the biological function and immune infiltration of gastric cancer cells
Liqiao Chen, Yi Zeng, Baoqing Ren, Xinyu Wang, Fucheng Zhao, Jitao Du, Rupeng Zhang, Jingyu Deng
The International Journal of Biochemistry & Cell Biology.2023; 158: 106407. CrossRef
Gastric Cancer Biomarker Candidates Identified by Machine Learning and Integrative Bioinformatics: Toward Personalized Medicine
Vigneshwar Suriya Prakash Sinnarasan, Dahrii Paul, Rajesh Das, Amouda Venkatesan
OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology.2023; 27(6): 260. CrossRef
Endoscopic evaluation by the Kyoto classification of gastritis combined with serum anti-Helicobacter pylori antibody testing reliably risk-stratifies subjects in a population-based gastric cancer screening program
Ryosuke Hirai, Mami Hirai, Motoyuki Otsuka, Toshiharu Mitsuhashi, Yuichi Shimodate, Hirokazu Mouri, Kazuhiro Matsueda, Hiroshi Yamamoto, Motowo Mizuno
Journal of Gastroenterology.2023; 58(9): 848. CrossRef
Determinants of gastric cancer screening attendance in Southeastern China: a cross-sectional study
Zhiwen Huang, Zhijian Hu, Li Ping Wong, Yulan Lin
BMJ Open.2023; 13(7): e073925. CrossRef
LINC00665 activating Wnt3a/β-catenin signaling by bond with YBX1 promotes gastric cancer proliferation and metastasis
Jie Wang, Dongxiao Shen, Shichao Li, Qiuying Li, Qingsong Zuo, Jiahao Lu, Donghao Tang, Yuejiao Feng, Peihao Yin, Chao Chen, Teng Chen
Cancer Gene Therapy.2023; 30(11): 1530. CrossRef
FIS1 Overexpression Is Correlated with Tumor Metastasis in Gastric Adenocarcinoma
Dariush Karimi, Negar Pedram, Farzad Kakaei, Milad Asadi, Elham Poursaei, Touraj Asvadi Kermani
Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer.2022; 53(2): 466. CrossRef
An Approach to the Primary and Secondary Prevention of Gastric Cancer in the United States
Robert J. Huang, Meira Epplein, Chisato Hamashima, Il Ju Choi, Eunjung Lee, Dennis Deapen, Yanghee Woo, Thuy Tran, Shailja C. Shah, John M. Inadomi, David A. Greenwald, Joo Ha Hwang
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2022; 20(10): 2218. CrossRef
Thrombospondin-2 holds prognostic value and is associated with metastasis and the mismatch repair process in gastric cancer
Xiao-dong Chu, Zheng-bin Lin, Ting Huang, Hui Ding, Yi-ran Zhang, Zhan Zhao, Shu-chen Huangfu, Sheng-hui Qiu, Yan-guan Guo, Xiao-li Chu, Jing-hua Pan, Yun-long Pan
BMC Cancer.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Beneficial effects of endoscopic screening on gastric cancer and optimal screening interval: a population-based study
Wen-Qing Li, Xiang-Xiang Qin, Zhe-Xuan Li, Le-Hua Wang, Zong-Chao Liu, Xiao-Han Fan, Li-Hui Zhang, Yi Li, Xiu-Zhen Wu, Jun-Ling Ma, Yang Zhang, Lan-Fu Zhang, Ming Li, Tong Zhou, Jing-Ying Zhang, Jian-Xi Wang, Wei-Dong Liu, Wei-Cheng You, Kai-Feng Pan
Endoscopy.2022; 54(09): 848. CrossRef
Current status of the gastric cancer screening program in Korea
Young-Il Kim, Il Ju Choi
Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(5): 250. CrossRef
Gastric hydrodistension CT versus CT without gastric distension in preoperative TN staging of gastric carcinoma: analysis of single-center cancer registry
Yu-Hsien Lee, Wen-Hui Chan, Ying-Chieh Lai, An-Hsin Chen, Chien-Ming Chen
Scientific Reports.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Small molecules as potential biomarkers of early gastric cancer: A mass spectrometry imaging approach
Long Zou, Luolin Wang, Lei Guo, Weixun Zhou, Zhizhen Lai, Cheng Zhu, Xi Wu, Zhili Li, Aiming Yang
Clinica Chimica Acta.2022; 534: 35. CrossRef
Gastric cancer incidence, mortality and burden in adolescents and young adults: a time-trend analysis and comparison among China, South Korea, Japan and the USA
Si Lin Wu, Yao Zhang, Yi Fu, Jian Li, Ji Sheng Wang
BMJ Open.2022; 12(7): e061038. CrossRef
Current Evidence for a Paradigm Shift in Gastric Cancer Prevention From Endoscopic Screening toHelicobacter pyloriEradication in Korea
Young-Il Kim, Il Ju Choi
Journal of Gastric Cancer.2022; 22(3): 169. CrossRef
Effectiveness of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer: The Japan Public Health Center‐based Prospective Study
Nobuhiro Narii, Tomotaka Sobue, Ling Zha, Tetsuhisa Kitamura, Motoki Iwasaki, Manami Inoue, Taiki Yamaji, Shoichiro Tsugane, Norie Sawada
Cancer Science.2022; 113(11): 3922. CrossRef
The Novel Protein ADAMTS16 Promotes Gastric Carcinogenesis by Targeting IFI27 through the NF-κb Signaling Pathway
Tuoyang Li, Junyi Zhou, Yingming Jiang, Yandong Zhao, Jintuan Huang, Weiyao Li, Zhenze Huang, Zijian Chen, Xiaocheng Tang, Hao Chen, Zuli Yang
International Journal of Molecular Sciences.2022; 23(19): 11022. CrossRef
Urine proteomic signatures predicting the progression from premalignancy to malignant gastric cancer
Hua Fan, Xue Li, Zhong-Wu Li, Nai-Ren Zheng, Li-Hua Cao, Zong-Chao Liu, Ming-Wei Liu, Kai Li, Wen-Hui Wu, Zhe-Xuan Li, Tong Zhou, Yang Zhang, Wei-Dong Liu, Lan-Fu Zhang, Wei-Cheng You, Yi Wang, Jianmin Wu, Kai-Feng Pan, Jun Qin, Wen-Qing Li
eBioMedicine.2022; 86: 104340. CrossRef
Forthcoming Step in Gastric Cancer Prevention: How Can Risk Stratification Be Combined with Endoscopic Screening for Gastric Cancer?
Chisato Hamashima
Gut and Liver.2022; 16(6): 811. CrossRef
Survival of gastric cancer in China from 2000 to 2022: A nationwide systematic review of hospital-based studies
Houqiang Li, Han Zhang, Hujia Zhang, Youxin Wang, Xiaobing Wang, Haifeng Hou
Journal of Global Health.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Optimal extent of lymph node dissection in gastric cancer
Zsolt Varga, Péter Kolozsi, Kitti Nagy, Dezső Tóth
Frontiers in Surgery.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Urine Proteomic Signatures Predicting the Progression from Premalignancy to Malignant Gastric Cancer
Hua Fan, Xue Li, Zhong-Wu Li, Nai-Ren Zheng, Li-Hua Cao, Zong-Chao Liu, Yi Wang, Ming-Wei Liu, Kai Li, Wen-Hui Wu, Zhe-Xuan Li, Tong Zhou, Yang Zhang, Wei-Dong Liu, Lan-Fu Zhang, Wei-Cheng You, Jianmin Wu, Kai-Feng Pan, Jun Qin, Wen-Qing Li
SSRN Electronic Journal .2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Disaggregated mortality from gastrointestinal cancers in Asian Americans: Analysis of United States death records
Robert J. Huang, Nora Sharp, Ruth Talamoa, Kristopher Kapphahn, Vedant Sathye, Bryant Lin, Malathi Srinivasan, Latha P. Palaniappan
International Journal of Cancer.2021; 148(12): 2954. CrossRef
Gastrointestinal cancers in China, the USA, and Europe
Yumo Xie, Lishuo Shi, Xiaosheng He, Yanxin Luo
Gastroenterology Report.2021; 9(2): 91. CrossRef
Endoscopic Screening and Surveillance for Gastric Cancer
Bokyung Kim, Soo-Jeong Cho
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America.2021; 31(3): 489. CrossRef
Improvement in the Mortality-to-Incidence Ratios for Gastric Cancer in Developed Countries With High Health Expenditures
Tzu-Wei Yang, Chi-Chih Wang, Wei-Cheng Hung, Yu-Hsiang Liu, Wen-Wei Sung, Ming-Chang Tsai
Frontiers in Public Health.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Extended Gastrectomy for T4b Gastric Adenocarcinoma: Single-Surgeon Experience
Mushegh А. Sahakyan, Artak Gabrielyan, Hmayak Petrosyan, Shushan Yesayan, Sevak S. Shahbazyan, Arthur M. Sahakyan
Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer.2020; 51(1): 135. CrossRef
Laparoscopic management of gastric remnant ischemia after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with Billroth-I anastomosis—A case report
Abdulaziz Alshehri, Hee-sung Kim, Byung Sik Kim
International Journal of Surgery Case Reports.2020; 66: 265. CrossRef
Modeling the Surface Field From an Ingested Radio Transmitter With an Approximate Attenuation Model for Gastroenterology Investigations
Yana A. Salchak, Hugo G. Espinosa, David V. Thiel
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.2020; 67(2): 504. CrossRef
The long-term population impact of endoscopic screening programmes on disease burdens of gastric cancer in China: A mathematical modelling study
Mingwang Shen, Ruyi Xia, Zheng Luo, Hongmei Zeng, Wenqiang Wei, Guihua Zhuang, Lei Zhang, Wanqing Chen
Journal of Theoretical Biology.2020; 484: 109996. CrossRef
CD40 DNA hypermethylation in primary gastric tumors; as a novel diagnostic biomarker
Mohammad Amini, Khodayar Ghorban, Ahad Mokhtarzadeh, Maryam Dadmanesh, Behzad Baradaran
Life Sciences.2020; 254: 117774. CrossRef
Bio-assay of the non-amidated progastrin-derived peptide (G17-Gly) using the tailor-made recombinant antibody fragment and phage display method: a biomedical analysis
Deniz Sadighbayan, Mohammad Reza Tohidkia, Tayebeh Mehdipour, Mohammad Hasanzadeh, Ahmad Yari Khosroushahi
Analytical Methods.2020; 12(21): 2735. CrossRef
A protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis of narrow band imaging endoscopy in detection of early gastric cancer
Li Zhang, Xiao-yu Liu, Gang Zhong, Zhi Xin, Xiang-Yu Sun, Zhen-Yu Wang
Medicine.2020; 99(33): e21420. CrossRef
Gastric cancer
Elizabeth C Smyth, Magnus Nilsson, Heike I Grabsch, Nicole CT van Grieken, Florian Lordick
The Lancet.2020; 396(10251): 635. CrossRef
Development and external validation of a nomogram to predict the risk of Upper gastrointestinal precancerous lesions in a non‐high‐incidence area
Hai‐Fan Xiao, Shi‐Peng Yan, Ji‐Gang Li, Zhao‐Hui Shi, Yan‐Hua Zou, Ke‐Kui Xu, Xian‐Zhen Liao
Cancer Medicine.2020; 9(22): 8722. CrossRef
The Clinicopathological Features and Staging at Presentation of Gastric Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Study
Syn Yi Chong, Soo Fan Ang
Asian Journal of Oncology.2020; 06: 120. CrossRef
Initial results from a multi-center population-based cluster randomized trial of esophageal and gastric cancer screening in China
Hongmei Zeng, Kexin Sun, Maomao Cao, Rongshou Zheng, Xibin Sun, Shuzheng Liu, Zhiyi Zhang, Yuqin Liu, Guizhou Guo, Guohui Song, Yigong Zhu, Xianghong Wu, Bingbing Song, Xianzhen Liao, Yanfang Chen, Mingyang Song, Edward Giovannucci, Guihua Zhuang, Wenqian
BMC Gastroenterology.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Gastric Mucosal Atrophy Impedes Housekeeping Gene Methylation in Gastric Cancer Patients
Jung-Hwan Oh, Mun-Gan Rhyu, Suk-Il Kim, Mi-Ri Yun, Jung-Ha Shin, Seung-Jin Hong
Cancer Research and Treatment.2019; 51(1): 267. CrossRef
Gastric Cancer – From Aetiology to Management: Differences Between the East and the West
W.L. Chan, K.O. Lam, V.H.F. Lee, M. Davidson, T.H. So, J.S. Li, I. Chau, D.L.W. Kwong
Clinical Oncology.2019; 31(8): 570. CrossRef
Using big data to see the forest and the trees: endoscopic submucosal dissection of early gastric cancer in Korea
Chang Seok Bang, Gwang Ho Baik
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine.2019; 34(4): 772. CrossRef
Review and Comparison of Cancer Biomarker Trends in Urine as a Basis for New Diagnostic Pathways
Carmen Bax, Beatrice Julia Lotesoriere, Selena Sironi, Laura Capelli
Cancers.2019; 11(9): 1244. CrossRef
Awareness of risk factors and warning symptoms and attitude towards gastric cancer screening among the general public in China: a cross-sectional study
Qi Liu, Xi Zeng, Wen Wang, Ruo-lin Huang, Yan-jin Huang, Shan Liu, Ying-hui Huang, Ying-xin Wang, Qing-hong Fang, Guoping He, Ying Zeng
BMJ Open.2019; 9(7): e029638. CrossRef
Preoperative gastric lavage in gastric cancer patients undergoing surgical, endoscopic or minimally invasive treatment: An oncological measure preventing peritoneal spillage of intragastric cancer cells and development of related metastases
Edoardo Virgilio, Genoveffa Balducci, Paolo Mercantini, Enrico Giarnieri, Maria Rosaria Giovagnoli, Monica Montagnini, Antonella Proietti, Rosaria D'Urso, Marco Cavallini
Medical Hypotheses.2018; 114: 30. CrossRef
Endoscopic Screening in Asian Countries Is Associated With Reduced Gastric Cancer Mortality: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review
Xing Zhang, Meng Li, Shuntai Chen, Jiaqi Hu, Qiujun Guo, Rui Liu, Honggang Zheng, Zhichao Jin, Yuan Yuan, Yupeng Xi, Baojin Hua
Gastroenterology.2018; 155(2): 347. CrossRef
Screening for gastric cancer with magnetically controlled capsule gastroscopy in asymptomatic individuals
An-Jing Zhao, Yang-Yang Qian, Hui Sun, Xi Hou, Jun Pan, Xiao Liu, Wei Zhou, Yi-Zhi Chen, Xi Jiang, Zhao-Shen Li, Zhuan Liao
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2018; 88(3): 466. CrossRef
Changing trends in clinico-pathologic characteristics and treatment outcomes in patients with gastric cancer: A single-center, public hospital, retrospective study
Min-Seung Gwak, Jong-Min Park
Korean Journal of Clinical Oncology.2018; 14(2): 69. CrossRef

PubReader
ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Effectiveness of Gastric Cancer Screening on Gastric Cancer Incidence and Mortality in a Community-Based Prospective Cohort

Cancer Res Treat. 2018;50(2):582-589. Published online June 9, 2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2017.048

XML Download

Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
Electronic Supplementary Material
NOTES
REFERENCES

Adherence to Cancer Prevention Guidelines and Cancer Incidence and Mortality: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Effectiveness of Gastric Cancer Screening on Gastric Cancer Incidence and Mortality in a Community-Based Prospective Cohort

Characteristic	GE screening			UGIS screening
Characteristic	Unscreened (n=6,553)	Screened (n=4,356)	p-value^a)	Unscreened (n=2,758)	Screened (n= 2,015)	p-value^a)
Proportion in total subjects (%)	60.1	39.9		57.8	42.2
Age (yr)	57.3±11.7	58.0±10.3	< 0.001	57.5±12.7	58.9±10.2	< 0.001
Sex
Male	2,564 (39.1)	1,803 (41.4)	0.02	1,076 (39.0)	778 (38.6)	0.78
Female	3,989 (60.9)	2,553 (58.6)		1,682 (61.0)	1,237 (61.4)
Body mass index (kg/m²)
< 25	3,856 (58.9)	2,377 (54.6)	< 0.001	1,486 (53.9)	1,002 (49.7)	< 0.001
≥ 25	1,973 (30.1)	1,237 (28.4)		995 (36.1)	566 (28.1)
Missing	724 (11.1)	742 (17.0)		277 (10.0)	447 (22.2)
Education (schooling year)
< 12	5,996 (91.5)	3,774 (86.6)	< 0.001	2,219 (80.5)	1,633 (81.0)	0.83
≥ 12	534 (8.2)	575 (13.2)		532 (19.3)	376 (18.7)
Missing	23 (0.4)	7 (0.2)		7 (0.3)	6 (0.3)
Smoking status
Never	4,168 (63.6)	2,693 (61.8)	< 0.001	1,791 (64.9)	1,277 (63.4)	0.22
Former	621 (9.5)	634 (14.6)		403 (14.6)	334 (16.6)
Current	1,739 (26.5)	1,014 (23.3)		554 (20.1)	393 (19.5)
Missing	25 (0.4)	15 (0.3)		10 (0.4)	11 (0.6)
Alcohol drinking status
Never	3,838 (58.6)	2,447 (56.2)	0.001	1,522 (55.2)	1,130 (56.1)	0.13
Former	327 (5.0)	284 (6.5)		194 (7.0)	108 (5.4)
Current	2,353 (35.9)	1,592 (36.6)		1,014 (36.8)	754 (37.4)
Missing	35 (0.5)	33 (0.8)		28 (1.0)	23 (1.1)

	Gastroendoscopic screening			Upper gastrointestinal tract series
	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)
General population
GC incidence
Never screened	84,030	191	1.00	26,036	53	1.00
Ever screened	46,636	137	1.21 (0.94-1.54)	18,222	50	0.83 (0.52-1.33)
Overall deaths
Never screened	89,172	1,503	1.00	28,484	353	1.00
Ever screened	50,626	682	0.87 (0.79-0.95)	20,266	198	0.84 (0.70-1.00)
GC-specific death
Never screened	88,929	82	1.00	28,392	13	1.00
Ever screened	50,194	25	0.58 (0.36-0.94)	20,001	9	0.91 (0.36-2.33)
Gastric cancer patients
Overall survivor rate
Never screened	1,640	91	1.00	354	34	1.00
Ever screened	793	87	2.24 (1.61-3.11)	217	32	1.36 (0.76-2.45)

	Gastroendoscopic screening			Upper gastrointestinal tract series
	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)
General population
GC incidence
Never screened	84,013	191	1.00	26,036	53	1.00
Screened once	14,278	32	2.19 (1.45-3.31)	9,992	18	0.92 (0.50-1.67)
More than two times	13,037	46	2.06 (1.30-3.28)	7,950	32	0.77 (0.42-1.43)
Unknown or missing^b)	19,320	59	0.83 (0.60-1.15)	281	0	NA
p-trend			< 0.001			0.35
GC-specific death
Never screened	88,911	82	1.00	28,392	13	1.00
Screened once	15,610	6	0.78 (0.33-1.82)	10,965	3	0.94 (0.26-3.43)
More than two times	14,324	6	0.59 (0.21-1.66)	8,731	6	0.92 (0.29-2.86)
Unknown or missing^b)	20,260	13	0.52 (0.28-0.96)	305	0	NA
p-trend			0.25			0.83
Gastric cancer patients
Overall survivor rate
Never screened	1,640	91	1.00	354	34	1.00
Screened once	224	20	7.66 (4.26-13.77)	119	14	1.22 (0.59-2.51)
More than two times	209	34	13.11 (7.38-23.30)	98	18	1.56 (0.74-3.28)
Unknown or missing^b)	360	33	0.94 (0.59-1.49)	0	0	NA
p-trend			< 0.001			0.24

	Age < 65 yr			Age ≥ 65 yr
	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)
GC-specific death
Never screened	67,595	36	1.00	21,334	46	1.00
Ever screened	37,271	14	0.66 (0.34-1.29)	12,923	11	0.47 (0.24-0.95)
Survival rate in GC patients
Never screened	1,112	73	1.00	528	18	1.00
Ever screened	583	65	1.83 (1.24-2.68)	210	22	8.84 (3.63-21.57)

	No gastritis			Gastritis
	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)	Person-years	No. of cases	HR^a) (95% CI)
GC-specific death
Never screened	79,782	73	1.00	6,624	8	1.00
Ever screened	29,944	21	0.77 (0.46-1.29)	18,966	4	0.18 (0.04-0.89)
Survival rate in GC patients
Never screened	1,471	81	1.00	111	7	1.00
Ever screened	538	56	2.12 (1.42-3.15)	226	29	2.11 (0.79-5.64)

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of screenees and non-screenees by GE or UGIS screening

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%) unless otherwise indicated. GE, gastroendoscopy; UGIS, upper gastrointestinal series.

Continuous variables were analyzed using the Student’s t test, categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test.

Table 2. Risk of GC incidence, GC-specific death and overall survival

GC, gastric cancer; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Adjusted age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection (positive vs. negative), cigarette smoking (yes vs. no), and alcohol consumption (yes vs. no).

Table 3. Risk of GC incidence, GC-specific death and overall survival by screening frequency

GC, gastric cancer; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; NA, not applicable.

Adjusted age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection (positive vs. negative), cigarette smoking (yes vs. no), and alcohol consumption (yes vs. no),

Unknown or missing frequency.

Table 4. Risk of GC-specific death and overall survival by age

GC, gastric cancer; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Adjusted age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection (positive vs. negative), cigarette smoking (yes vs. no), and alcohol consumption (yes vs. no).

Table 5. Risk of GC-specific death and overall survival by history of gastritis

GC, gastric cancer; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Adjusted age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection (positive vs. negative), cigarette smoking (yes vs. no), and alcohol consumption (yes vs. no).