Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer diagnosis and fourth leading cause of cancer-related death globally. The incidence of gastric cancer in the USA shows significant racial and ethnic disparities with gastric cancer incidence in Korean Americans being over five times higher than in non-Hispanic whites. Since gastric cancer is not common in the USA, there are no current screening guidelines. In countries with higher incidences of gastric cancer, screening guidelines have been implemented for early detection and intervention and this has been associated with a reduction in mortality. Immigrants from high incidence countries develop gastric cancer at lower rates once outside of their country of origin, but continue to be at higher risk for developing gastric cancer. This risk does seem to decrease with subsequent generations. With increasing availability of endoscopy, initiating gastric cancer screening guidelines for high-risk groups can have the potential to improve survival by diagnosing and treating gastric cancer at an earlier stage. This article aims to provide context to gastric cancer epidemiology globally, review risk factors for developing gastric cancer, highlight racial and ethnic disparities in gastric cancer burden in the USA, examine current guidelines that exist in high incidence countries, and suggest future studies examining the efficacy of additional screening in high-risk populations to reduce gastric cancer mortality and disparate burden on ethnic minorities in the USA.

This paper gives a brief introduction on the development of recognized consensus standards, the recognition working procedure and the overview of medical devices recognized consensus standards in USA, and analyzes the experience of the recognition management system in USA, aiming at providing a reference for the improvement of the medical device standard management system in China.

BACKGROUND: Because international guidelines recommend best practices regarding staging of incident bladder cancer, we determined the adherence to such recommendations in the United States, performing a large retrospective database analysis.
METHODS: Patients with the diagnosis of urothelial cancer were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database between 1992 and 2007. Staging procedures were identified and analyzed. As reference for published recommendations, we used the American Urological Association (AUA), European Association of Urology (EAU), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. Based on these sources, recommended initial staging of bladder cancer was analyzed. Of all 56,130 patients, 6148 (10.9%) had a cytologic examination, 29,677 (52.9%) had a standard urinalysis, 2882 (5.1%) underwent intravenous pyelography (IVP), 6950 (12.4%) underwent retrograde pyelography (RPG), and 8145 (14.5%) had computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI).
RESULTS: There was a significant trend over the years to a higher use of cytologic analysis, standard urinalysis, and CT/MRI. We observed a significant trend toward a lower rate of IVP and a stable use of RPG. The limitation of our study is that claims data are designed for payment processing, not quality measurement.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite published recommendations on the initial diagnosis of bladder cancer, our data show that less than half of the included patients received all the elements thought to be required for an initial diagnosis of bladder cancer as recommended by guidelines. Greater adherence to recommendations may ensure optimal treatment strategies. Appropriate treatment is critical to patient outcomes, because evidence-based therapeutic management can be practiced only if an accurate assessment of the disease takes place at the time of initial diagnosis.