ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2025
CLDN18.2 expression in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: prevalence, heterogeneity, and prognostic implications in Spanish patients.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence of Claudin 18.2 Expression in Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Intra- and intertumoral discordance of Claudin-18.2: a systematic review and meta-analysis.ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Claudin 18 isoform 2 (CLDN18.2) has emerged as a novel therapeutical target for HER2-negative, locally advanced, or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. However, reported prevalence rates vary widely (24-47%), underscoring the need for accurate population-specific data. This study investigates the CLDN18.2 prevalence in Spanish patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma and explores its correlation with other biomarkers and clinicopathological factors. We retrospectively analyzed endoscopic biopsy samples from gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma patients across three Spanish institutions. CLDN18.2 expression was evaluated by immunohistochemistry using the Ventana CLDN18 (43-14A) assay and PS2+ scoring, with cases showing membranous 2+ or 3+ staining in ≥ 75% of tumor cells classified as positive. Clinicopathological and biomarker data were retrieved from medical records. CLDN18.2 was positive in 33% (89/270) of cases. Although histological type was not correlated with CLDN18.2 status, cases with poorly cohesive morphology exhibited heterogeneous staining, with a predominance of moderately and strongly stained cells. A weak to moderate inverse correlation was identified between signet ring cell content and CLDN18.2 staining (r = -0.29, p = 0.028). No significant differences were observed in clinical outcome. However, among patients with advanced-stage disease, CLDN18.2-positive intestinal tumors were associated with worse progression-free survival (HR 2.58, 95% CI 1.18-5.63; p = 0.029). These findings confirm a 33% prevalence of CLDN18.2 expression in the Spanish population, aligning with reports from other Western European cohorts. The significant heterogeneity in poorly cohesive cases and an inverse correlation with signet ring cell content pose diagnostic challenges for pathologists. Moreover, the association between CLDN18.2 positivity and worse progression-free survival in intestinal adenocarcinoma supports a potential role in tumor progression and metastasis, warranting further research.
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.