ReviewDer Pathologe2020
[Intratumoral heterogeneity of gastric cancer-impact on biomarker evaluation].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comprehensive analysis of the prognostic value, expression characteristics and immune correlation of MKI67 in cancers.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessment of programmed death-ligand 1 expression in primary tumors and paired lymph node metastases of gastric adenocarcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- [Standardized and quality-assured predictive PD-L1 testing in the upper gastrointestinal tract. German version].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Standardized and quality-assured predictive PD-L1 testing in the upper gastrointestinal tract.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Review
- Article
- Identification of hub genes in gastric cancer by integrated bioinformatics analysis.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastric carcinomas often measure more than 5 cm at primary diagnosis. Predictive biomarker testing is usually carried out on tissue biopsies, which do not represent the entire tumor biology and intratumoral heterogeneity.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to explore gastric cancer's intratumoral heterogeneity and its impact on the evaluation of predictive and prognostic biomarkers. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study cohort consisted of approximately 500 patients with therapy-naive adenocarcinomas of the stomach or the esophagogastric junction. The following biomarkers were determined: HER2, MET, Ki67, PD-L1/PD‑1, VISTA, EBV-status, and PIK3CA.
resultsAll examined biomarkers were influenced by gastric cancer's intratumoral heterogeneity. Tissue biopsies might carry the risk of sampling errors, which may significantly hamper adequate tumor classification in a clinical setting.
conclusionsOur findings unravel issues of tumor heterogeneity in gastric cancer. Biomarker diagnostics on tissue biopsies should be carried out on at least five biopsies of different tumor areas. If possible, biomarker diagnostics should be repeated on resection specimens. Tissue microarrays should no longer be used for research studies of gastric cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.