G A A b st ra ct s others [55.4 (30.6-71.7) ng/mL in GU-M and 24.1 (16.7-59.2) ng/mL in GU-U, respectively]. Consequently, the more proximal the ulcer located in the stomach, the lower the PGI/PGII ratio was; 4.15 (3.51-5.00) in DU, 5.09 (4.13-6.40) in GU-P, 3.46 (2.70-4.12) in GU-A, 3.12 (2.70-3.45) in GU-L, 2.70 (2.37-3.79) in GU-M, and 1.80 (1.38-2.43) in GU-U. 7/65 (10.8%), 3/65 (4.6%) and 0/65 (0.0%) in DU, 1/9 (11.1%), 0/9 (0.0%) and 0/9(0.0%) in GU-P, 12/48(25.0%), 6/48(12.5%) and 0/48(0.0%) in GU-A, 3/12 (25.0%), 1/12 (8.3%) and 0/12 (0.0%) in GU-L, 11/21 (52.4%), 9/21 (42.9%) and 0/21 (0.0%) in GU-M, and 14/17 (82.4%), 12/17 (70.6%) and 9/17 (52.9%) in GU-U, were compatible with each of the three respective criteria in screening tests of subjects at high-risk for gastric cancer; PGI ≦ 70 ng/mL and PGI/PGII ratio ≦ 3.0, PGI ≦ 50 ng/mL and PGI/PGII ratio ≦ 3.0, and PGI ≦ 30 ng/mL and PGI/PGII ratio ≦ 2.0. CONCLUSIONS: PGI and the PGI/PGII ratio correlated well with the location of an ulcer. It is thought that patients with an ulcer in the middle body or more proximal differ from those with more distally located one, when considering gastric acid secretory function and gastric cancer risk.
Read full abstract