ArticleHistopathology2026
The OLGIMA system for gastric cancer risk assessment. A useful method based on the histological Sydney consensus.
Article in Histopathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Screening strategies for the early detection of non-cardia gastric cancer in low- to moderate-prevalence regions: Asia-Pacific gastroesophageal cancer congress consensus 2026.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026Review
- Gastric Mucosa Cancer Risk: The Operative Link on Gastritis Assessment Staging System.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2026Review
- Management of Gastric Precancerous Lesions and Early Cancer: Practice-Oriented Answers to Clinical Questions.Cancers · 2026Review
- [Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia: an Update on Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Risk Stratification, and Clinical Management].Acta gastroenterologica LatinoamericanaReview
- 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
30 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe risk stratification of gastric cancer (GC) is graded by assessing well-established precursor lesions, glandular atrophy (GA), and intestinal metaplasia (IM), resulting in both the operative link on gastritis assessment (OLGA), and intestinal metaplasia (OLGIM) systems. Although the OLGIM stage is reproducible among pathologists, the OLGA system is laborious to calculate and has poor reproducibility. In addition, it does not comprehensively address the severity of both GA and IM as recommended by the Sydney consensus. We aimed to propose the Operative Link on Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia and Glandular Atrophy Assessment (OLGIMA) system, which identifies OLGIM III-IV and upstages 0-II with advanced GA.
methodsA cross-sectional study of consecutive diagnostic gastroscopies in adults was designed. Systematic gastric biopsies were taken. The updated Sydney guidelines were used for histological grading of GA and IM. Higher GC risk was defined as OLGIM III-IV and advanced GA.
resultsThe OLGIMA stage was assessed based on the most severe GA and/or IM findings in both antrum and corpus. We included 998 patients (median age 57; 64% women; 35% Helicobacter pylori infection). Thirty-nine (3.9%) patients had higher GC risk: 17 (1.7%) with OLGIM III-IV; 12 (1.2%) with advanced GA, and 10 (1%) meeting both criteria. Among OLGIM 0-II, 12 (1.2%) patients had advanced GA. The OLGIMA system upstaged 39 (3.9%) patients to III-IV, being more sensitive than OLGIM.
conclusionsThe new OLGIMA system identifies patients at higher GC risk (OLGIMA III-IV), encompassing all OLGIM III-IV patients, and upstaging those OLGIM 0-II with advanced GA. This approach addresses the OLGA and OLGIM limitations by integrating GA and IM severity as recommended by the Updated Sydney consensus.
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.