Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24113309›Full record

ReviewAdvances in anatomic pathology2013

Classification of rhabdomyosarcoma and its molecular basis.

David M Parham, Frederic G Barr

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in anatomic pathology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 159 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
159citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

159 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 339 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Gene Amplification in Rhabdomyosarcoma: Lessons from a Rare Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

99 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

David M Parham*Department of Pathology, University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, Oklahoma City, OK †Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Frederic G Barr
National Cancer Institute · US

Funding

COG FOREIGN ACCRUALU10CA098543 · NCI · NATIONAL CHILDHOOD CANCER FOUNDATION · PI ADAMSON, PETER C. · 2003 to 2013
$335.5M
Studies of gene fusions in rhabdomyosarcomaZIABC011387 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI BARR, FREDERIC · 2011 to 2025
$9.1M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999NCI NIH HHS U10 CA098543
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS), the most common soft tissue sarcoma in children, has traditionally been classified into embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma (ERMS) and alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (ARMS) for pediatric oncology practice. This review outlines the historical development of classification of childhood RMS and the challenges that have been associated with it, particularly problems with the diagnosis of "solid variant" ARMS and its distinction from ERMS. In addition to differences in clinical presentation and outcome, a number of genetic features underpin separation of ERMS from ARMS. Genetic differences associated with RMS subclassification include the presence of reciprocal translocations and their associated fusions in ARMS, amplification of genes in ARMS and its fusion subsets, chromosomal losses and gains that mostly occur in ERMS, and allelic losses and mutations usually associated with ERMS. Chimeric proteins encoded in most ARMS from the fusion of PAX3 or PAX7 with FOXO1 are expressed, result in a distinct pattern of downstream protein expression, and appear to be the proximate cause of the bad outcome associated with this subtype. A sizeable minority of ARMS lacks these fusions and shares the clinical and biological features of ERMS. A battery of immunohistochemical tests may prove useful in separating ERMS from ARMS and fusion-positive ARMS from fusion-negative ARMS. Because of limitation of predicting outcome solely based on histologic classification, treatment protocols will begin to utilize fusion testing for stratification of affected patients into low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups.

Indexed as

ChildForkhead Box Protein O1Forkhead Transcription FactorsHumansOncogene Proteins, FusionPaired Box Transcription FactorsPAX3 Transcription FactorPAX7 Transcription FactorPrognosisRhabdomyosarcoma, AlveolarRhabdomyosarcoma, EmbryonalTranslocation, GeneticForkhead Box Protein O1Forkhead Transcription FactorsFOXO1 protein, humanOncogene Proteins, FusionPaired Box Transcription FactorsPAX3 protein, humanPAX3 Transcription FactorPAX7 protein, humanPAX7 Transcription Factor

Identifiers

PMID24113309
PMCPMC6637949
OpenAlexW2018310400

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.