This study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic resection (ER), laparoscopic resection (LR), laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS), and open surgery (OpS) for gastrointestinal stromal tumors with small diameters ( ≤ 5 cm). Relevant studies were collected through Pubmed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases. Operative time, hospital stays, time to liquid diet, intraoperative bleeding, and complications were used as outcome indicators for meta-analysis. Twenty-four retrospective cohort studies with 2406 participants were analyzed. LR and OpS groups had longer operating time than the ER group. ER, LECS, and LR groups had decreased lengths of hospital stay than the OpS group. Moreover, patients in LR and LECS groups had fewer complications than those in the OpS group. Endoscopic operation for small gastrointestinal stromal tumors contributes to shortened lengths of surgery and hospital stay. This reduces intraoperative blood loss and promotes gastroenteric functional recovery without increasing the risk of complications or tumor recurrence.

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of multidisciplinary treatment for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) who underwent radical gastrectomy. Patients and Methods: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of surgery alone, adjuvant chemotherapy (CT), adjuvant radiotherapy (RT), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), neoadjuvant CT, neoadjuvant RT, neoadjuvant CRT, perioperative CT and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for LAGC were searched. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence and metastasis, long-term mortality, adverse events (grade ≥3), operative complications and R0 resection rate were used as outcome indicators for meta-analysis. Results: Forty-five RCTs with 10077 participants were finally analysed. Adjuvant CT had higher OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.74, 95% credible interval [CI] = 0.66–0.82) and DFS (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.60–0.74) than surgery-alone group. Perioperative CT (odds ratio [OR] = 2.56, 95% CI = 1.19–5.50) and adjuvant CT (OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.27–0.86) both had more recurrence and metastasis than HIPEC + adjuvant CT, while adjuvant CRT tended to have less recurrence and metastasis than adjuvant CT (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.29–2.42) and even adjuvant RT (OR = 1.83, 95% CI = 0.98–3.40). Moreover, the incidence of mortality in HIPEC + adjuvant CT was lower than that in adjuvant RT (OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.11–0.72), adjuvant CT (OR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.23–0.86) and perioperative CT (OR = 2.39, 95% CI = 1.05–5.41). Analysis of adverse events (grade ≥3) showed no statistically significant difference between any two adjuvant therapy groups. Conclusion: A combination of HIPEC with adjuvant CT seems to be the most effective adjuvant therapy, which contributes to reducing tumour recurrence, metastasis and mortality – without increasing surgical complications and adverse events related to toxicity. Compared with CT or RT alone, CRT can reduce recurrence, metastasis and mortality but increase adverse events. Moreover, neoadjuvant therapy can effectively improve the radical resection rate, but neoadjuvant CT tends to increase surgical complications.

Background: Owing to complex molecular mechanisms in gastric cancer (GC) oncogenesis and progression, existing biomarkers and therapeutic targets could not significantly improve diagnosis and prognosis. This study aims to identify the key genes and signaling pathways related to GC oncogenesis and progression using bioinformatics and meta-analysis methods.Methods: Eligible microarray datasets were downloaded and integrated using the meta-analysis method. According to the tumor stage, GC gene chips were classified into three groups. Thereafter, the three groups’ differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified by comparing the gene data of the tumor groups with those of matched normal specimens. Enrichment analyses were conducted based on common DEGs among the three groups. Then protein–protein interaction (PPI) networks were constructed to identify relevant hub genes and subnetworks. The effects of significant DEGs and hub genes were verified and explored in other datasets. In addition, the analysis of mutated genes was also conducted using gene data from The Cancer Genome Atlas database.Results: After integration of six microarray datasets, 1,229 common DEGs consisting of 1,065 upregulated and 164 downregulated genes were identified. Alpha-2 collagen type I (COL1A2), tissue inhibitor matrix metalloproteinase 1 (TIMP1), thymus cell antigen 1 (THY1), and biglycan (BGN) were selected as significant DEGs throughout GC development. The low expression of ghrelin (GHRL) is associated with a high lymph node ratio (LNR) and poor survival outcomes. Thereafter, we constructed a PPI network of all identified DEGs and gained 39 subnetworks and the top 20 hub genes. Enrichment analyses were performed for common DEGs, the most related subnetwork, and the top 20 hub genes. We also selected 61 metabolic DEGs to construct PPI networks and acquired the relevant hub genes. Centrosomal protein 55 (CEP55) and POLR1A were identified as hub genes associated with survival outcomes.Conclusion: The DEGs, hub genes, and enrichment analysis for GC with different stages were comprehensively investigated, which contribute to exploring the new biomarkers and therapeutic targets.