ReviewESMO gastrointestinal oncology2026
Intra- and intertumoral discordance of Claudin-18.2: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in ESMO gastrointestinal oncology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Claudin-18.2 status is increasingly used to guide targeted therapy based on immunohistochemistry of limited tumor tissue. Spatial heterogeneity may produce discordant expression patterns within a primary tumor or discordant positivity classification between primary and metastatic sites, limiting the representativeness of a single specimen. No prior meta-analysis has quantified the magnitude of this discordance, either in gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer or in other tumor types. Materials and methods: We carried out a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus were searched for studies reporting Claudin-18.2 intratumoral discordance within primary tumors and/or intertumoral discordance between primary tumors and matched metastases. Intratumoral discordance was operationalized according to each study's reported evidence of spatial variation in expression, whereas intertumoral discordance was defined as disagreement in positivity classification between matched primary and metastatic samples using study-specific cut-offs. Random-effects models pooled logit-transformed discordance proportions. Robustness was evaluated using leave-one-out sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses explored potential sources of heterogeneity. Between-study heterogeneity and small-study effects were assessed using Cochran's Results: Thirteen studies ( Conclusion: Claudin-18.2 expression shows substantial intratumoral and clinically meaningful discordance between primary and metastatic tumors in gastric/GEJ cancer. Single-specimen testing may misclassify eligibility and multisite testing should be considered.
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.