Back to all available

Analysis of serum nutrients in Correa cascade of gastric carcinogenesis

gastroenterology-and-hepatology
nutrition
oncology

Abstract

Background. Gastric cancer can develop stepwise along the Correa cascade. The consumption of various nutrients is linked to gastric cancer risk. This study aimed to examine the relationship between serum nutrient levels and the gastric carcinogenesis cascade.

Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional study including 25 patients each with chronic non-atrophic gastritis (NAG), chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG), early gastric cancer (EGC), and advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Serum concentrations of 21 amino acids, 7 vitamins, and 11 minerals were measured and analyzed for differences between groups, correlations with gastric mucosal lesion severity, correlations with gastric cancer risk, and diagnostic performance for gastric cancer.

Results. The OPLS-DA analysis identified key nutrients that were responsible for the main differences in the serum nutrient profiles among the NAG, CAG, EGC, and AGC groups, such as glutamate, aluminum, tyrosine, and manganese. Spearman correlation analysis identified the nutrients that were significantly correlated with gastric mucosal lesion severity, including selenium, aluminum, aspartate, methionine, Vitamin B1, manganese, and 25-OH-D2. Multivariate logistic regression found that the concentration of 25-OH-D2 was inversely correlated with the risk of gastric cancer. ROC curve analysis found that the combination of 25-OH-D3 and 25-OH-D2 showed good diagnostic efficacy for early gastric cancer [AUC=0.866 (95% CI, 0.735–0.948), sensitivity=0.96, specificity=0.63].

Conclusions. Dysregulation of serum nutrients is a key feature of gastric carcinogenesis. Notably, serum vitamin D levels were inversely associated with gastric cancer risk and showed high diagnostic efficacy for early gastric cancer.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].