ArticleThe British journal of surgery2026
Management of gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis: International Gastric Cancer Association GCPM Working Group consensus statements.
Article in The British journal of surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From operating room to pathology report: Delphi consensus on pathological assessment of peritoneal cytology and biopsies in staging laparoscopy for gastric cancer.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026Article
- Catheter based intraperitoneal chemotherapy using taxane for peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer: from bench to bedside-a narrative review.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
43 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastric cancer peritoneal metastasis (GCPM) is a common manifestation of advanced gastric cancer, associated with poor prognosis.
methodsThe International Gastric Cancer Association (IGCA) convened a multidisciplinary working group of 42 global experts from 15 countries to develop a total of 13 consensus statements addressing diagnosis, treatment, and research priorities for GCPM. Using ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document (ACCORD)-compliant methodology, the group conducted systematic literature searches and applied a structured Delphi process with anonymous Likert-scale voting and a ≥70% consensus threshold to generate and refine consensus statements.
resultsConsensus was achieved for all 13 statements among the working group during the first Delphi round, with 75-100% of respondents selecting either 'strongly agree' or 'agree'. Coefficient of variation values were ≤0.23. Polling of a broader group of experts (n = 66), which included members of the working group (n = 21), during a GCPM consensus session at the 16th International Gastric Cancer Congress (IGCC) in 2025 demonstrated agreement for 12 of the 13 statements. This broader group of experts, which had greater representation from medical oncologists, did not reach consensus (52% agreement) on best practice for systemic treatment of patients with GCPM, possibly due to the rapidly evolving developments in this field of metastatic gastric cancer.
conclusionThis consensus exercise provides a foundation for globally relevant GCPM management strategies and highlights critical research needed to address significant evidence gaps that will improve patient outcomes.
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.