ArticleHNO2008
[Prognostic value of immunohistochemistry in salivary gland cancer].
Article in HNO, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Salivary gland carcinomas.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2012Review
- [Pleomorphic adenoma: pitfalls and clinicopathological forms of progression].Der Pathologe · 2009Article
- Epidermal growth factor receptor kinase domain mutations are rare in salivary gland carcinomas.British journal of cancer · 2009Article
- Mucinous adenocarcinoma of minor salivary glands: a high-grade malignancy prone to lymph node metastasis.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2009Article
- New agents in the treatment for malignancies of the salivary and thyroid glands.Hematology/oncology clinics of North America · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diversity of salivary gland malignancies as to morphology and clinical course makes it difficult to establish prognostic factors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of, a. o., immunohistochemical criteria in a retrospective study of salivary gland cancer. PATIENTS AND
methodsClinical and histologic data were recorded for 101 patients with carcinomas of the salivary glands. Immunohistochemistry was performed for Ki-67, P53, C-KIT, HER2, EGFR, and maspin. Correlations to disease-specific long-term survival (mean follow-up 4.7 years) were followed by univariate and multivariate analysis.
resultsFindings included the following: an association between loss of maspin and the presence of nodal metastasis, residual tumour, and poor overall survival for adenoid cystic carcinoma; common C-KIT expression in adenoid cystic carcinoma (92%); correlation of loss of C-KIT with high malignancy grade, nodal metastases, high proliferative activity (Ki-67>30%), and unfavourable survival in all tumours; common HER2 expression (83%) in salivary duct carcinoma but no relation to the total collective's survival. Overexpression of EGFR was associated with poor survival rates. In multivariate analysis, a high proliferation index was the strongest predictive factor, followed by the presence of residual tumour, overexpression of EGFR, and advanced clinical stage.
conclusionsThe clinical stage is of higher prognostic value than histology and grade of malignancy. High proliferative activity (Ki-67>30%) is the strongest negative predictor in salivary gland cancer. Besides well-known clinicopathological factors, current immunohistochemical markers such as maspin, EGFR, and C-KIT can contribute to establish prognosis in salivary gland cancer.
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.