Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19763614›Full record

ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2009

p16 INK4 and CEA can be mutually exchanged with confidence between both relevant three-marker panels (ER/Vim/CEA and ER/Vim/p16 INK4) in distinguishing primary endometrial adenocarcinomas from endocervical adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study.

Chih-Ping Han, Ming-Yung Lee, Yeu-Sheng Tyan, Lai-Fong Kok, Chung-Chin Yao, Po-Hui Wang, Jeng-Dong Hsu, Szu-Wen Tseng

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The prognosis significance of TGF-β1 and ER protein in cervical adenocarcinoma patients with stage Ib~IIa.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2014
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Chih-Ping HanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chung-Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. hanhaly@gmail.com
Ming-Yung Lee
Yeu-Sheng Tyan
Lai-Fong Kok
Chung-Chin Yao
Po-Hui Wang
Jeng-Dong Hsu
Szu-Wen Tseng
Chung Shan Medical University Hospital · TWChina Medical University Hospital · TWChung Shan Medical University · TWProvidence University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The accurate distinction between primary endocervical adenocarcinomas (ECA) and endometrial adenocarcinomas (EMA) may require the use of multiple ancillary monoclonal antibodies in panels of immunohistochemistry stains. In addition to reappraising the expressions of four commonly used individual monoclonal antibodies [estrogen receptor (ER), Vimentin (Vim), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and p16(INK4)], this study was designed to investigate whether CEA and p16(INK4) can be effectively exchanged between two relevant three-marker panels (ER/Vim/CEA vs. ER/Vim/p16(INK4)) in distinguishing ECA from EMA. A tissue microarray was constructed using paraffin-embedded, formalin-fixed tissues from 35 hysterectomy specimens, including 14 ECA and 21 EMA. Utilizing the avidin-biotin technique, tissue array sections were immunostained with the four aforementioned individual markers (ER, Vim, CEA, and p16(INK4)). In addition to the four individual monoclonal antibodies, both their respective three-marker panels, proposed here, showed statistically significant (p < 0.05) frequency differences between these two gynecologic tumors (ECA vs. EMA). The panel performance and test effectiveness revealed that both three-marker panels are promising and very helpful. According to our data, when histomorphological and clinical doubt exists as to the primary site of origin, we recommend using either of these two conventional three-marker panels, which consist of ER/Vim/CEA and ER/Vim/p16(INK4). CEA and p16(INK4) can be interchanged with confidence without significantly influencing the panel presentations and efficiencies in distinguishing between adenocarcinomas of endocervical and endometrial origin.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAntibodies, MonoclonalBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoembryonic AntigenCyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor p16Endometrial NeoplasmsFemaleHumansSensitivity and SpecificityTissue Array AnalysisUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAntibodies, MonoclonalBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoembryonic AntigenCyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor p16

Identifiers

PMID19763614
OpenAlexW2006257273

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.