Recurrent Fusion Genes in Gastric Cancer: CLDN18-ARHGAP26 Induces Loss of Epithelial Integrity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genome rearrangements, a hallmark of cancer, can result in gene fusions with oncogenic properties. Using DNA paired-end-tag (DNA-PET) whole-genome sequencing, we analyzed 15 gastric cancers (GCs) from Southeast Asians. Rearrangements were enriched in open chromatin and shaped by chromatin structure. We identified seven rearrangement hot spots and 136 gene fusions. In three out of 100 GC cases, we found recurrent fusions between CLDN18, a tight junction gene, and ARHGAP26, a gene encoding a RHOA inhibitor. Epithelial cell lines expressing CLDN18-ARHGAP26 displayed a dramatic loss of epithelial phenotype and long protrusions indicative of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Fusion-positive cell lines showed impaired barrier properties, reduced cell-cell and cell-extracellular matrix adhesion, retarded wound healing, and inhibition of RHOA. Gain of invasion was seen in cancer cell lines expressing the fusion. Thus, CLDN18-ARHGAP26 mediates epithelial disintegration, possibly leading to stomach H(+) leakage, and the fusion might contribute to invasiveness once a cell is transformed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".