ReviewGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2026
Tackling similarities and differences in global practice guidelines for gastric cancer: a review on the latest Taiwan guidelines with Asia-Pacific, European and US guidelines.
Review in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biomarker discordance in gastric cancer: from tissue snapshots to treatment-defining assays.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastric cancer (GC) remains a global health burden. While international guidelines share consensus, variations exist in disputed issues. The 2025 Taiwan Consensus and Management Guidelines for Gastric Cancer had just been released. We compared the key recommendations with established international guidelines.
methodsA multidisciplinary taskforce addressed key questions and recommendations using modified Delphi method and evidence-based approaches. The comparative review aimed to elucidate similarities and differences among guidelines from Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, China, Europe, and the US.
resultsGuidelines converge on absolute endoscopic resection criteria for early GC but differ in extended indications and perioperative approaches for locally advanced disease. Heterogeneity exists in biomarker assessment protocols, cutoff thresholds, and companion diagnostics. For metastatic disease, consensus exists on anti-HER2, anti-VEGF, immunotherapy, and biomarker-driven strategies, though oligo-metastatic definitions and intraperitoneal chemotherapy indications remain controversial.
conclusionOptimal GC management requires integrating global evidence with regional contexts. The comparative review addresses heterogeneity among international guidelines, which helps harmonize management strategies as therapeutic standards evolve.
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.