Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21467149›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2011

Diagnosis and treatment of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: current data on a prospectively collected, retrospectively analyzed clinical multicenter investigation.

Martin B Niederle, Bruno Niederle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. [Gastric neuroendocrine tumors. Endoscopic and surgical treatment].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2011
    Review
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

2 authors.

Martin B NiederleSection of Endocrine Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gür, Austria. martin.niederle@meduniwien.ac.at
Bruno Niederle

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this prospectively collected, retrospectively analyzed clinical investigation was to describe "unmasked" clinical symptoms and methods of diagnosis, treatment, and short-term follow-up of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) diagnosed during 1 year in Austria.

methodsIn total, 277 patients with GEP-NETs were documented. All tumors were immunhistochemically defined according to recently summarized criteria (World Health Organization, European Neuroendocrine Tumour Society). A standardized questionnaire comprising 50 clinical and biochemical parameters (clinical symptoms, mode of diagnosis, treatment, follow-up) was completed by attending physicians.

resultsThe most common initial symptoms were episodes of abdominal pain, diarrhea, weight loss, gastrointestinal bleeding, flushing, and bowel obstruction. Overall, 48.1% of tumors were diagnosed by endoscopy, 43.7% were diagnosed during surgery, 5% were diagnosed by fine-needle aspiration of the primary or metastases, and 2.5% were diagnosed during autopsy; 44.5% of tumors were not suspected clinically and were diagnosed incidentally during various surgical procedures. Overall, 18.7% of tumors were removed endoscopically and 67.6% were removed surgically; 13.7% of patients were followed without interventional treatment. Endoscopic or surgical intervention was curative in 81.4% of patients and palliative in 18.6% of patients. At the time of diagnosis, information on metastasis was available in 83.7% of patients with malignant NETs. Lymph node or distant metastases were documented in 74.7% of patients. In 19.3% of patients, 41 secondary tumors were documented, with 78.0% classified histologically as adenocarcinomas.

conclusionThis investigation summarizes the clinical presentation and current practice of management of GEP-NETs and thereby extends the understanding and clinical experience.

Indexed as

AustriaColonic NeoplasmsDisease ProgressionHumansIleal NeoplasmsIntestinal NeoplasmsJejunal NeoplasmsMulticenter Studies as TopicNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingNeuroendocrine TumorsPancreatic NeoplasmsProspective StudiesRectal NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesStomach Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID21467149
PMCPMC3228191

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.