ArticleDer Pathologe2009
[Comparing immunohistochemical diagnosis of cancer of unknown primary with gene expression-based tumor classification].
Article in Der Pathologe, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Five percent of cancer cases present as metastases. If the primary tumor cannot be identified after diagnostic workup, the disease is referred to as cancer of unknown primary (CUP) and is classified as C80.9 according to ICD-10. In Germany, CUP is among the ten most common causes of tumor-related death, with mortality similar to mortality in gastric or pancreatic cancer. Biopsies of the tumor manifestation are generally examined histopathologically and by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Gene expression profiling (GEP) is a new diagnostic technique that might further contribute to tumor specification.In a retrospective study, 43 CUP cases underwent central immunohistochemical review and centrally performed GEP using a classifier based on 495 genes. There was concordance between IHC, GEP and clinical picture in 54% of cases. In four cases, the combination of methods led to an unequivocal identification of the primary tumor.In conclusion, we regard detailed IHC workup and complementary GEP advisable for the purposes of targeted therapy, as well as to identify or exclude specific tumors in a CUP situation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19756615What 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.