Table 2 Tumour characteristics of gastric carcinomas according to ethnicity

From: EBV-associated gastric carcinoma in high- and low-incidence areas for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

 

Inuit n =106

Danes n =106

 
 

N

%

N

%

P -value

EBV status

0.99

 EBV-positive gastric carcinoma

9

8.5

9

8.5

 

 EBV-negative gastric carcinoma

97

91.5

97

91.5

 

Material

0.48

 Biopsy

42

39.6

38

35.8

 

 Gastrectomy specimens

64

60.4

68

64.2

 

Location

0.005a

 Proximal

25

23.6

40

37.7

 

 Distal

55

51.9

37

34.9

 

 Diffuse

5

4.7

11

10.4

 

 Unknown

21

19.8

18

17.0

 

Histology (WHO)

0.24b

 Papillary

3

2.8

3

2.8

 

 Tubular

71

67.0

63

59.4

 

 Mucinous

4

3.8

1

0.9

 

 Signet-ring cell

20

18.9

25

23.6

 

 Undifferentiated

7

6.6

13

12.3

 

 Adenosquamous

1

0.9

1

0.9

 

Histology (Laurén)

0.27c

 Intestinal

72

67.9

67

63.2

 

 Diffuse

31

29.2

39

36.8

 

 Mixed

3

2.8

0

0

 

Differentiation of tubular type carcinomas

0.25d

 Good

11

15.5

6

9.5

 

 Moderate

37

52.1

31

49.2

 

 Poor

23

32.4

26

41.2

 

Degree of lymphocyte infiltration

0.07d

 Low

54

50.9

65

61.3

 

 Moderate

46

43.4

38

35.8

 

 Abundant

6

5.7

3

2.8

 

Pattern of lymphocyte infiltration

0.99e

 Lymphoepithelioma-like

0

0

0

0

 

 Nodular

22

20.7

22

20.7

 

 Diffuse

80

75.5

84

79.2

 

 Follicular infiltration

4

3.8

0

0

 
  1. EBV=Epstein–Barr virus; WHO=World Health Organisation.
  2. Tubular adenocarcinomas were categorised as well differentiated (well-formed glands), moderately differentiated (intermediate between well differentiated and poorly differentiated) and poorly differentiated (highly irregular glands that are recognised with difficulty or single cells that remain isolated or are arranged in small clusters) according to WHO 2000. The pattern and degree of lymphocytic infiltration was assessed semi-quantitatively as either absent, mild, moderate or abundant infiltration by examining 10 medium power fields ( × 200 magnification). The pattern of lymphocyte infiltration was determined as lymphoepithelioma-like, nodular, diffuse or follicular.
  3. aNon-distal vs distal location, samples with ‘unknown’ location not included.
  4. bTubular histology vs other types.
  5. cSamples with ‘mixed’ histology not included.
  6. dP-value represents trend test.
  7. eNodular infiltration vs other types.
Back to article page