Abstract:Dear Editor, This letter reports some observations on the recent article entitled “Meta‐analysis of the prognostic value of CpG island methylator phenotype in gastric cancer” by Powell et al (2018) reporting that gastric cancers showing CpG island methylator phenotype‐high (CIMP‐H) were associated with poor 5‐year survival. The conclusion was reached by a well‐conducted meta‐analysis. However, as the authors claimed, there was significant heterogeneity among the 10 included studies (I = 88%, P < .001), but they applied a fixed‐effects model, which might limit the conclusion. As a result of a lack of a standardized definition of CIMP in gastric cancer, the authors noticed that the conflicting survival results might be caused by the choice of CIMP gene panel. Currently, gene‐specific methylation markers and genomewide DNA methylation profile were the 2 major methods to define CIMP. To limit the heterogeneity among studies and make the conclusion more precise, we regrouped the 10 included studies into 3 subgroups according to different methodologies and the similarities of gene panels, and then carried out subgroup analysis. The studies of Park et al and Shigeyasu et al were classified as the multiple gene panel group because over 15 CIMP marker genes were used in each of them. An et al, Ben Ayed‐Guerfali et al, He et al, Ksiaa et al, and Kusano et al were classified as the p16 or MINT‐based gene panel group, whereas the remaining 3 studies (Chang et al, Chen et al and Liu et al) were classified as the mixed gene panel group because there were no similarities among them. By subgroup analysis, we found that CIMP‐H was significantly associated with poor prognosis in the p16 or MINT‐based gene panel group, but not in the other 2 subgroups (Figure 1A). Interestingly, the overall effects of CIMP‐H in the p16 or MINT‐based gene panel group were almost the same as those in the total of the 3 subgroups (Z = 2.62, P = .009; Z = 2.61, P = .009) and the p16 or MINT-based gene panel group presents 51.5% in weight among the 3 subgroups, suggesting that the overall effects of CIMP‐H in the total of the 3 subgroups were mainly decided by the p16 or MINT‐based gene panel group. As a result of large heterogeneity, we then analyzed the data by the random‐effects model. Surprisingly, in all 3 subgroups, CIMP‐H did not have any association with poor 5‐year survival (P > .05) (Figure 1B). In summary, we may conclude that CIMP is not a prognostic marker in gastric cancer.

CpG island methylator phenotype is associated with the efficacy of sequential oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy and EGFR-related gene mutation in Japanese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Su2001 Snail/CXCL-8 Axis Promotes Expression of the Novel Surface Marker CD58 and Self-Renewal of Tumor-Initiating Cells in Colorectal Cancer

CpG Island Methylator Phenotype and Its Association with Malignancy in Sporadic Duodenal Adenomas

Effect of DNA methylation status on first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Comprehensive Biostatistical Analysis of CpG Island Methylator Phenotype in Colorectal Cancer Using a Large Population-Based Sample

Comprehensive analysis of CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP)‐high, ‐low, and ‐negative colorectal cancers based on protein marker expression and molecular features

Tracking the Correlation Between CpG Island Methylator Phenotype and Other Molecular Features and Clinicopathological Features in Human Colorectal Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Clinical and prognosis value of the CIMP status combined with MLH1 or p16 INK4a methylation in colorectal cancer

Immune microenvironmental heterogeneity according to tumor DNA methylation phenotypes in microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancers

MCC Gene Silencing Is a CpG Island Methylator Phenotype-Associated Factor That Predisposes Colon Cancer Cells to Irinotecan and Olaparib

Different Definitions of CpG Island Methylator Phenotype and Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer: a Systematic Review

Association between gut microbiota and CpG island methylator phenotype in colorectal cancer

Status and Significance of CpG Island Methylator Phenotype in Endometrial Cancer

Aberrant DNA methylation patterns in microsatellite stable human colorectal cancers define a new marker panel for the CpG island methylator phenotype

Deciphering the etiology and role in oncogenic transformation of the CpG island methylator phenotype: a pan-cancer analysis

[Relationship Between CpG Island Methylator Phenotype and Genetic Instability in Sporadic Colorectal Cancer].

Prognostic Value of CpG Island Methylator Phenotype in Gastric Cancer.

Advances in CpG Island Methylator Phenotype Colorectal Cancer Therapies

Integrative Genome-Scale DNA Methylation Analysis of a Large and Unselected Cohort Reveals 5 Distinct Subtypes of Colorectal Adenocarcinomas

Characterization of the CpG island methylator phenotype subclass in papillary thyroid carcinoma

Colorectal cancer molecular classification using BRAF, KRAS, microsatellite instability and CIMP status: Prognostic implications and response to chemotherapy