Gastric Cancer Screening Methods: A Comparative Study of the Chinese New Gastric Cancer Screening Score and Kyoto Classification of Gastritis

Table 6

Comparison of histologic type and location of gastric cancer results between the two scoring methods.

Scoring method/risk stratification	Histologic type of GC		Location of GC
	Differentiated	Undifferentiated	GEJ	Gastric body	Gastric angle	Gastric antrum
Chinese new gastric cancer screening scoring system (Li’s score)
Low risk (No. 585)	4 (0.68%)	14 (2.39%)	4 (0.68%)	1 (0.17%)	2 (0.34%)	11 (1.88%)
Medium risk (No. 93)	5 (5.38%)	13 (13.98%)	3 (3.23%)	2 (2.15%)	2 (2.15%)	11 (11.83%)
High risk (No. 24)	1 (4.17%)	3 (12.50%)	0	1 (4.17%)	1 (4.17%)	2 (8.33%)
Kyoto Classification of Gastritis scoring system
Low risk (No. 384)	1 (0.26%)	1 (0.26%)	0	2 (0.52%)	0	0
Medium risk (No. 171)	3 (1.75%)	7 (4.09%)	2 (1.17%)	0	2 (1.17%)	6 (3.51%)
High risk (No. 147)	6 (4.08%)	22 (14.97%)	5 (3.40%)	2 (1.36%)	3 (2.04%)	18 (12.24%)

No.: case number; GC: gastric cancer; GEJ: gastroesophageal junction.