ReviewJournal of endocrinological investigation2002
Pituitary carcinoma: report of an exceptional case and review of the literature.
Review in Journal of endocrinological investigation, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical features of pituitary carcinoma: analysis based on a case report and literature review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Review
- Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for ACTH-secreting pituitary carcinoma: a new emerging treatment?European journal of endocrinology · 2021Article
- Overexpression of microRNA-34a Attenuates Proliferation and Induces Apoptosis in Pituitary Adenoma Cells via SOX7.Molecular therapy oncolytics · 2018Article
- Corticotrophic pituitary carcinoma with cervical metastases: case series and literature review.Pituitary · 2018Review
- Malignant transformation in non-functioning pituitary adenomas (pituitary carcinoma).Pituitary · 2018Review
- Extremely late development of pituitary carcinoma after surgery and radiotherapy.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2009Article
- Malignant pituitary corticotroph adenomas: report of two cases and a comprehensive review of the literature.Pituitary · 2009Review
- Pituitary carcinoma: diagnosis and treatment.Endocrine · 2005Review
- Best Practice No 172: pituitary gland pathology.Journal of clinical pathology · 2003Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pituitary carcinomas are exceptional tumors and constitute 0.1 to 0.2% of pituitary tumors. Their definition includes well-established criteria but distant metastasis is the hallmark required for diagnosis. We report the fourth case of gonadotropic pituitary carcinoma described in the literature. This case illustrates the dramatic outcome of these tumors. The most interesting feature of our case was the loss of differentiation with time, established by retrospective analysis of the primary tumor surgically treated 15 years earlier. Most of the previously reported cases exhibited a majority of adrenocoticotropin and non-functioning pituitary tumors. However, the frequency of non-functioning tumors seems smaller than previously believed. In the discussion, we stress the need to detect these very aggressive tumors as early as possible and identify treatments to improve the dramatic course of these carcinomas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.