Scholarlink

Introduction <p>Hepatoid adenocarcinoma of the stomach (HAS) is a rare form of gastric cancer. This study assessed the impact of tumor node metastasis (TNM) stage on survival in HAS compared with non-HAS patients, identified prognostic factors, and developed a predictive nomogram.</p> Methods <p>Patients diagnosed with HAS between September 2012 and August 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical characteristics and survival outcomes were compared between HAS and non-HAS groups before and after TNM stage matching. Prognostic factors were determined using Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression analyses, and nomograms were constructed for survival prediction.</p> Results <p>Without stage matching, HAS patients showed significantly worse survival than non-HAS patients (HR = 3.09, 95% CI: 2.05–4.67, p &lt; 0.001). After TNM stage matching, no significant difference was observed (HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 0.79–1.64, p = 0.476). The nomogram model incorporating Sal-like protein 4 (SALL4), serum iron (Fe), and free prostate-specific antigen (fPSA) accurately predicted overall survival (AUC = 0.946, 95% CI: 0.897–0.994).</p> Conclusions <p>These findings suggest that poorer outcomes in HAS are primarily due to advanced TNM stages, and that SALL4, serum Fe, and fPSA serve as key prognostic indicators.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Prognostic model for patients with hepatoid adenocarcinoma of the stomach

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月23日

查看全文
  • Shan Tong,
  • Boqi Xu,
  • Xiang Ye,
  • Jun Yin,
  • Hao Hu

摘要

Introduction

Hepatoid adenocarcinoma of the stomach (HAS) is a rare form of gastric cancer. This study assessed the impact of tumor node metastasis (TNM) stage on survival in HAS compared with non-HAS patients, identified prognostic factors, and developed a predictive nomogram.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with HAS between September 2012 and August 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical characteristics and survival outcomes were compared between HAS and non-HAS groups before and after TNM stage matching. Prognostic factors were determined using Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression analyses, and nomograms were constructed for survival prediction.

Results

Without stage matching, HAS patients showed significantly worse survival than non-HAS patients (HR = 3.09, 95% CI: 2.05–4.67, p < 0.001). After TNM stage matching, no significant difference was observed (HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 0.79–1.64, p = 0.476). The nomogram model incorporating Sal-like protein 4 (SALL4), serum iron (Fe), and free prostate-specific antigen (fPSA) accurately predicted overall survival (AUC = 0.946, 95% CI: 0.897–0.994).

Conclusions

These findings suggest that poorer outcomes in HAS are primarily due to advanced TNM stages, and that SALL4, serum Fe, and fPSA serve as key prognostic indicators.