ReviewDer Pathologe2013
[Molecular pathological diagnosis in cytopathology of non-small-cell lung cancer. Standardization of specimen processing].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Immunophenotyping of lung tumors : An update].Der Pathologe · 2019Review
- Lung cancer: developments, concepts, and specific aspects of the new WHO classification.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2016Review
- [Cytological material for molecular pathology].Der Pathologe · 2015Review
- [Lung cancer. Developments, concepts and preview of the new WHO classification].Der Pathologe · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPersonalized medicine is becoming standard for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. For example, patients with activating EGFR mutations or EML4-ALK translocations largely benefit from targeted therapies with tyrosine kinase inhibitors with better response rates and progression-free survival compared to standard chemotherapy regimens. However, the application of the respective molecular biomarker analyses requires great expertise in the handling of different cell and tissue specimens. A major challenge for reliable analyses is the usually low amount of tumor material. There are currently relatively few standardized and evidence-based guidelines for the processing and analysis of respective specimens as well as for interpretation of the test results. MATERIALS AND
methodsTo establish a basis for standardized predictive cytopathological analyses, different material processing approaches and molecular pathological tests are discussed, and novel concepts and strategies are lined out in order to improve the quality and reliability of the respective diagnostic procedures. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Predictive analyses of cytological specimens can be reliably performed using smears, cytospins or cell blocks; there is no need for histological specimens. The diagnostic work-up of cytological probes should be performed as carefully as possible in order to save further tumor material for subsequent predictive analyses. With standardized and reliable procedures at hand cytopathology is an important contribution to the multidisciplinary, complex care, and treatment of lung cancer patients.
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.