ArticleSaudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society2012
Histochemical analysis and immunohistochemical profile of mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the conjunctiva.
Article in Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A rare case of mucoepidermoid carcinoma ex-pleomorphic adenoma of the hard palate.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2023Article
- Conjunctival 'mucoepidermoid carcinoma' revisited: a revision of terminology, based on morphologic, immunohistochemical and molecular findings of 14 cases, and the 2018 WHO Classification of Tumours of the Eye.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2020Article
- White papules in lower right eyelid as a manifestation of mucoepidermoid carcinoma.JAAD case reports · 2019Article
- Conjunctival Intraepithelial Neoplasia with Mucoepidermoid Differentiation: A Case Report of a Subtle Lesion.Ocular oncology and pathology · 2015Article
- A case of conjunctival mucoepidermoid carcinoma in Australia.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo elucidate the distinct histochemical and immunohistochemical profile of mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the conjunctiva (MECC) and to determine which combination of stains is most useful in diagnosing MECC and differentiating it from squamous cell carcinoma of the conjunctiva (SCC) in cases where the clinical or cytological findings are not definitive.
methodsEight specimen of MECC from 4 patients and 4 specimens of SCC from 4 patients were examined using a variety of special stains and immunohistochemical markers. The results were then analyzed for usefulness in diagnosing MECC.
resultsThe most useful markers in diagnosing MECC and differentiating it from SCC are mucicarmine, colloidal iron, and alcian blue all with sensitivities of 88%, and a specificity of 100%; CEA with a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 75%; and, mucin-1 with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 25%, but which showed a distinct pattern of staining of MECC when compared to SCC. In our series, the sensitivity of the CK7+/CK20- combination for MECC was only 38%.
conclusionsThe most useful stains in ruling out SCC in a suspected case of MECC were shown to be mucicarmine and the glycosaminoglycan (GAG) stains. However, in cases where mucicarmine and the GAG stains are negative or difficult to interpret and there is suspicion of a diagnosis of MECC, CEA and mucin-1 may be helpful for this diagnosis. The findings of CK7+/CK20- also may be of assistance, but are not as sensitive when compared to analogous salivary gland lesions, when differentiating MECC from SCC.
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.