ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Development and validation of a novel blood-based biomarker for gastric cancer triage in chronic dyspepsia.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Global implementation of gastric cancer (GC) screening in chronic dyspepsia populations faces challenges due to the high number-needed-to-scope (NNS) for oesophagogastroduodenoscopy. Routine blood tests (RBT) have limited utility for GC screening but offer potential for risk stratification when repurposed through machine learning. This study develops and validates a machine-learning-integrated biomarker (RBT-GC) that uses opportunistic triage to optimise endoscopy resource allocation. The team analysed 20 years of territory-wide retrospective data (2000-2020) from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. 24 RBT and demographic features from 210,463 subjects (3071 cases) between 2000 and 2015 were used in training. An independent cohort of 90,479 subjects (2066 cases) from 2016 to 2020 was used in validation. The RBT-GC model successfully stratified validation cohort (2.3% baseline GC prevalence) into low-risk (0.3% prevalence), intermediate-risk (1.9%) and high-risk (14.0%) categories. The model detected (1276 cases) 12x more than CEA (102 cases) and 30x more than CA19.9 (42 cases). The application of opportunistic RBT-GC risk stratification reduced the NNS from 44 to 7 in the high-risk category of validation cohort. This machine learning approach repurposed standard blood tests into an opportunistic, affordable, scalable triage tool to alleviate endoscopic burdens across healthcare systems.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.