Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Frontiers in Oncology · September 24, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Objective Gastric cancer (GC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally. While molecular targeted therapies against HER2 and PD-L1 have advanced, the role of receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) co-activation, specifically between c-MET and EGFR, remains elusive in GC. This study aimed to investigate the correlation between c-MET and EGFR overexpression and clinicopathological features and prognosis in patients with gastric cancer, and to reveal prognostic significance of co-expression of c-MET and EGFR in gastric adenocarcinoma. Methods The clinicopathological data of 214 Chinese patients with GC were retrospectively analyzed, and the expression level of c-MET and EGFR were detected by immunohistochemistry. χ 2 test was used to investigate associations with clinicopathological features. Kaplan-Meier survival curve and Cox proportional hazards models were employed to analyze the relationship between c-MET, EGFR and co-expression and patient prognosis. Results The positive expression rates for c-MET and EGFR were 21.96% (47/214) and 68.22% (146/214), respectively. c-MET overexpression was significantly served as an independent predictor of poor OS ( P=0.023 ). Conversely, EGFR expression alone showed no significant prognostic value. Notably, 18.22% (39/214) of cases exhibited co-expression of c-MET and EGFR. Patients with isolated EGFR expression exhibited the most favorable prognosis, while the isolated c-MET expression group had the worst clinical survival. Moreover, patients with c-MET and EGFR co-expression achieved better survival than those with isolated c-MET expression ( P = 0.007 ). Conclusion c-MET overexpression is a robust prognostic indicator of adverse outcomes in GC. The frequent co-expression of c-MET and EGFR suggests a potential mechanism of RTK cross-talk, warranting further investigation into dual-targeted therapeutic strategies.