Abstract
Background: The ABCD screening method was developed for risk stratification of gastric cancer. It is unclear whether the ABCD method can predict the risk of gastric neoplasms, including gastric adenomas, as observed for gastric cancer. We aimed to devise a modified ABCD method for predicting gastric neoplasms. Methods: We reviewed 562 patients who had undergone upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy and whose serum IgG anti-Helicobacter pylori antibody, gastrin, and pepsinogen (PG) I and PG II data were available. Patients were classified into the following four groups: H. pylori antibody negative and normal PG level (group A), H. pylori antibody positive and normal PG level (group B), H. pylori antibody positive and low PG level (group C), and H. pylori antibody negative and low PG level (group D). Results: The PG I/PG II ratio was lower in patients with gastric neoplasms than in patients without these lesions (gastric adenoma vs gastric cancer vs no neoplasm, 3.7 ± 2.0 vs 3.8 ± 1.8 vs 4.9 ± 2.1, P < 0.001). The optimal cutoff values of the PG I/PG II ratio for predicting gastric neoplasms were 3.1 for H. pylori antibody negative patients and 4.1 for H. pylori antibody positive patients. A higher group grade was associated with a significantly higher proportion of gastric neoplasms [odds ratio (95 % confidence interval), group A, reference; group B, 1.783 (1.007–3.156); group C, 3.807 (2.382–6.085); and group D, 5.862 (2.427–14.155)]. Conclusions: The modified ABCD method using two different cutoff values according to the H. pylori antibody status was useful for predicting the presence of gastric neoplasms. This method might be a supplementary screening tool for both gastric adenoma and gastric cancer. However, further studies will be required to provide a definitive conclusion.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 128-135 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Gastric Cancer |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2016 Jan 1 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Oncology
- Gastroenterology
- Cancer Research
Cite this
}
The new modified ABCD method for gastric neoplasm screening. / Park, Chan Hyuk; Kim, Eun Hye; Jung, Da Hyun; Chung, Hyunsoo; Park, Jun Chul; Shin, Sung Kwan; Lee, Sang Kil; Lee, Yong Chan.
In: Gastric Cancer, Vol. 19, No. 1, 01.01.2016, p. 128-135.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - The new modified ABCD method for gastric neoplasm screening
AU - Park, Chan Hyuk
AU - Kim, Eun Hye
AU - Jung, Da Hyun
AU - Chung, Hyunsoo
AU - Park, Jun Chul
AU - Shin, Sung Kwan
AU - Lee, Sang Kil
AU - Lee, Yong Chan
PY - 2016/1/1
Y1 - 2016/1/1
N2 - Background: The ABCD screening method was developed for risk stratification of gastric cancer. It is unclear whether the ABCD method can predict the risk of gastric neoplasms, including gastric adenomas, as observed for gastric cancer. We aimed to devise a modified ABCD method for predicting gastric neoplasms. Methods: We reviewed 562 patients who had undergone upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy and whose serum IgG anti-Helicobacter pylori antibody, gastrin, and pepsinogen (PG) I and PG II data were available. Patients were classified into the following four groups: H. pylori antibody negative and normal PG level (group A), H. pylori antibody positive and normal PG level (group B), H. pylori antibody positive and low PG level (group C), and H. pylori antibody negative and low PG level (group D). Results: The PG I/PG II ratio was lower in patients with gastric neoplasms than in patients without these lesions (gastric adenoma vs gastric cancer vs no neoplasm, 3.7 ± 2.0 vs 3.8 ± 1.8 vs 4.9 ± 2.1, P < 0.001). The optimal cutoff values of the PG I/PG II ratio for predicting gastric neoplasms were 3.1 for H. pylori antibody negative patients and 4.1 for H. pylori antibody positive patients. A higher group grade was associated with a significantly higher proportion of gastric neoplasms [odds ratio (95 % confidence interval), group A, reference; group B, 1.783 (1.007–3.156); group C, 3.807 (2.382–6.085); and group D, 5.862 (2.427–14.155)]. Conclusions: The modified ABCD method using two different cutoff values according to the H. pylori antibody status was useful for predicting the presence of gastric neoplasms. This method might be a supplementary screening tool for both gastric adenoma and gastric cancer. However, further studies will be required to provide a definitive conclusion.
AB - Background: The ABCD screening method was developed for risk stratification of gastric cancer. It is unclear whether the ABCD method can predict the risk of gastric neoplasms, including gastric adenomas, as observed for gastric cancer. We aimed to devise a modified ABCD method for predicting gastric neoplasms. Methods: We reviewed 562 patients who had undergone upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy and whose serum IgG anti-Helicobacter pylori antibody, gastrin, and pepsinogen (PG) I and PG II data were available. Patients were classified into the following four groups: H. pylori antibody negative and normal PG level (group A), H. pylori antibody positive and normal PG level (group B), H. pylori antibody positive and low PG level (group C), and H. pylori antibody negative and low PG level (group D). Results: The PG I/PG II ratio was lower in patients with gastric neoplasms than in patients without these lesions (gastric adenoma vs gastric cancer vs no neoplasm, 3.7 ± 2.0 vs 3.8 ± 1.8 vs 4.9 ± 2.1, P < 0.001). The optimal cutoff values of the PG I/PG II ratio for predicting gastric neoplasms were 3.1 for H. pylori antibody negative patients and 4.1 for H. pylori antibody positive patients. A higher group grade was associated with a significantly higher proportion of gastric neoplasms [odds ratio (95 % confidence interval), group A, reference; group B, 1.783 (1.007–3.156); group C, 3.807 (2.382–6.085); and group D, 5.862 (2.427–14.155)]. Conclusions: The modified ABCD method using two different cutoff values according to the H. pylori antibody status was useful for predicting the presence of gastric neoplasms. This method might be a supplementary screening tool for both gastric adenoma and gastric cancer. However, further studies will be required to provide a definitive conclusion.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84951568064&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84951568064&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10120-015-0473-4
DO - 10.1007/s10120-015-0473-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 25663259
AN - SCOPUS:84951568064
VL - 19
SP - 128
EP - 135
JO - Gastric Cancer
JF - Gastric Cancer
SN - 1436-3291
IS - 1
ER -