ReviewClinical and translational medicine2026
The evolving landscape of the Warburg effect in gastric cancer: From molecular mechanisms to targeted therapy.
Review in Clinical and translational 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGastric cancer (GC) remains a major health burden because of late-stage diagnosis and resistance to systemic therapy. MAIN BODY: In GC, the Warburg effect is driven by interconnected hypoxia and oncogenic signalling, non-coding RNA networks and transcriptional and epigenetic rewiring. These regulators converge on glucose transport and core glycolytic enzymes, including HK2, PFKFB3, PKM2 and LDHA. The resulting increase in aerobic glycolysis, pyruvate-to-lactate conversion and lactate export supports biosynthesis, redox homeostasis and survival under metabolic stress. Beyond its bioenergetic role, lactate acts as a signalling metabolite that acidifies and remodels the tumour microenvironment. It impairs CD8-positive T and natural killer cells function, promotes regulatory T cells accumulation and M2 macrophages polarisation, activates stromal cells and facilitates epithelial-mesenchymal transition and immune evasion. Together, tumour-intrinsic metabolic adaptation and lactate-mediated microenvironmental reprogramming contribute to resistance to chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Translationally, metabolic imaging, circulating LDH and lactate-related markers, exosomal glycolytic enzymes, gene-expression signatures and lactylation-related features may improve prognostic assessment, treatmentresponse prediction and patient stratification. These findings support biomarker-guided combination strategies that target tumour metabolism, lactate production or transport and stromalimmune crosstalk alongside standard therapies. This review uniquely integrates direct GC-derived evidence with indirect evidence from non-GC models and clinical trials and grades biomarkers and metabolic interventions according to their translational maturity.
conclusionOverall, the Warburg effect represents both a central driver of GC progression and a clinically relevant metabolic vulnerability. KEY POINTS: The Warburg effect in gastric cancer is a multi-module metabolic state, not a single glycolytic phenotype. Lactate links glycolytic reprogramming to stromal activation, immune evasion and therapy resistance. Microbiota, especially H. pylori, modulates glycolysis and creates actionable upstream vulnerabilities. Biomarker-guided combinations, rather than isolated glycolytic inhibition, define the translational path forward.
Indexed as
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.