ArticleGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2026
Sensitivity and specificity of endoscopic and radiographic screening for localized gastric cancer in a real-world, population-based setting.
Article 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Japan, radiography with barium meal and endoscopy are recommended methods for population-based gastric cancer screening for individuals aged ≥ 50 years. However, no recent real-world evidence is available on the performance of endoscopic and radiographic screening in detecting localized gastric cancer. Therefore, we estimated the sensitivity and specificity of endoscopy and radiography in detecting gastric cancer and its clinical stages in a real-world, population-based screening setting.
methodsWe cross-referenced data from a population-based gastric cancer screening database with a regional cancer registry database. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value of endoscopy (n = 61,658) and radiography (n = 73,653) for gastric cancer and its clinical stages. Age- and sex-standardized sensitivity values were estimated using regression standardization.
resultsFor localized gastric cancer, endoscopy showed higher sensitivity (83.4% vs. 65.3%), specificity (99.0% vs. 88.7%), and PPV (27.4% vs. 2.2%) than radiography. The corresponding estimates for men were 83.3% vs. 65.6%, 98.7% vs. 87.3%, and 31.1% vs. 3.1%; for women, they were 83.6% vs. 64.5%, 99.3% vs. 89.9%, and 20.5% vs. 1.2%. The age- and sex-standardized sensitivity of endoscopy was also higher than that of radiography (83.6% vs. 65.3%, p < 0.001).
conclusionsIn this descriptive study, endoscopy showed higher sensitivity, specificity, and PPV than radiography for gastric cancer overall and across its clinical stages (localized, regional, distant). Our findings provide updated evidence to inform population-based screening efforts in countries with high gastric cancer incidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42714747What 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.