ArticleFamilial cancer2009
Analysis of families with Lynch syndrome complicated by advanced serrated neoplasia: the importance of pathology review and pedigree analysis.
Article in Familial cancer, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Testing region selection and prognostic analysis ofGastroenterology report · 2024Article
- Tumour MLH1 promoter region methylation testing is an effective prescreen for Lynch Syndrome (HNPCC).Journal of medical genetics · 2014Article
- Article
- Article
- MLH1 promoter hypermethylation in the analytical algorithm of Lynch syndrome: a cost-effectiveness study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2012Article
- Immunohistochemical testing of conventional adenomas for loss of expression of mismatch repair proteins in Lynch syndrome mutation carriers: a case series from the Australasian site of the colon cancer family registry.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2012Article
- Phenotypic diversity in patients with multiple serrated polyps: a genetics clinic study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2010Article
- Lessons from Lynch syndrome: a tumor biology-based approach to familial colorectal cancer.Future oncology (London, England) · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 11 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The identification of Lynch syndrome has been greatly assisted by the advent of tumour immunohistochemistry (IHC) for mismatch repair (MMR) proteins, and by the recognition of the role of acquired somatic BRAF mutation in sporadic MMR-deficient colorectal cancer (CRC). However, somatic BRAF mutation may also be present in the tumours in families with a predisposition to develop serrated polyps in the colorectum. In a subgroup of affected members in these families, CRCs emerge which demonstrate clear evidence of MMR deficiency with absent MLH1 staining and high-level microsatellite instability (MSI). This may result in these families being erroneously classified as Lynch syndrome, or conversely, an individual is considered "sporadic" due to the presence of a somatic BRAF mutation in a tumour. In this report, we describe two Lynch syndrome families who demonstrated several such inconsistencies. In one family, IHC deficiency of both MSH2 and MLH1 was demonstrated in tumours from different affected family members, presenting a confusing diagnostic picture. In the second family, MLH1 loss was observed in the lesions of both MLH1 mutation carriers and those who showed normal MLH1 germline sequence. Both families had Lynch syndrome complicated by an independently segregating serrated neoplasia phenotype, suggesting that in families such as these, tumour and germline studies of several key members, rather than of a single proband, are indicated to clarify the spectrum of risk.
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.