Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,435

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Hepatogastroenterology

·2011·Hepatogastroenterology

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To explore the predictive value of markers in detection of recurrence after resection. METHODOLOGY: This study was a case-control retrospective analysis; 521 patients underwent radical gastrectomy from April 2000 to January 2008, among whom 142 cases with complete data were involved. Seventy one were confirmed with recurrence, while the other 71 without recurrence were randomly selected from the database as control. We analyzed the popular serum marker change patterns and their correlation with imaging. RESULTS: The two groups were well balanced in characteristics. Among the 3 markers, CA72.4 appeared highest in sensitivity (35.2%) while CEA had the lowest sensitivity. The sensitivity of triple-marker was 62.0%. We found that CEA, CA19-9 and CA72.4 elevated 2-4 months before imaging demonstration. If the cut-off values of CEA and CA19-9 were set twice as the upper limit of the normal, the specificities will increase to 98.6% and 94.4%, respectively. The sensitivity of single marker (CEA or CA 2.4) was 33.3% in predicting peritoneal metastasis, triple-marker had the highest sensitivity (66.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The combined of CEA, CA19-9 and CA72.4 had 62.0% sensitivity in the diagnosis of recurrence after radical surgery. Patients whose tumor markers continue to increase should be highly suspected for relapse.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5754/hge11753

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 2,435

Metadata

Venue
Hepatogastroenterology
Published
2011-10-27
Volume
58
Issue
112
Pages
2166-70
ISSN
0172-6390 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2276907497
Cited by
2,435
References
0
Type
paratext
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hepatogastroenterology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5754/hge11753
The paper
Hepatogastroenterology. (2011). Hepatogastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.5754/hge11753

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.