Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19816686›Full record

ReviewDer Pathologe2009

[The initial CUP situation and CUP syndrome: pathological diagnostics].

R Moll

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Pathologe, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

1 author.

R MollInstitut für Pathologie, Philipps-Universität Marburg und Universitätsklinikum Giessen und Marburg GmbH, Standort Marburg, Baldingerstr, 35033 Marburg. mollr@med.uni-marburg.de

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

"Cancer of unknown primary (site)" (CUP) represents a frequent and often difficult task for diagnostic histopathology. In the initial CUP situation, immunohistochemistry, which is relatively cost-efficient and non-burdensome for the patient, contributes substantially to the targeted search for and identification of the primary tumor. It may be performed in a two-step algorithm (keratins as the first step, group and selective markers as the second step). However, in true CUP syndrome--a heterogeneous disease whose etiology and pathogenesis is still poorly understood--the primary tumor is rarely identified, and the immunohistochemical marker profile is often anomalous. Nevertheless, immunohistochemistry remains the most important special method, aiming at the phenotypical classification and particularly the identification of certain favorable therapy-responsive subsets. Novel methods for subtyping of CUP based on the analysis of gene expression profiles need to be further evaluated before their possible diagnostic application. Future basic and clinical research is required to unravel the still enigmatic tumor biology of the CUP syndrome and to improve the hitherto very unfavorable prognosis by developing new efficient therapy regimens.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBiomarkers, TumorDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleGene Expression ProfilingHumansImmunohistochemistryKeratinsMaleNeoplasms, Unknown PrimaryPredictive Value of TestsBiomarkers, TumorKeratins

Identifiers

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.