ReviewAnalytical chemistry insights2015
Immunohistochemical Markers of Soft Tissue Tumors: Pathologic Diagnosis, Genetic Contributions, and Therapeutic Options.
Review in Analytical chemistry insights, 2015. 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Histological and Immunohistochemical Findings of an Extremely Rare Multi-Organ Metastasis of Fibrosarcoma in a Holstein Cow.Veterinary medicine and science · 2025Article
- Image-guided synovial biopsy with a focus on neoplastic lesions.Skeletal radiology · 2023Review
- A Rare Case of a Primary Unilateral Low-Grade Paratesticular Leiomyosarcoma in a 2 Years Old Dog.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2019Article
- Improving Immunohistochemistry Capability for Pediatric Cancer Care in the Central American and Caribbean Region: A Report From the AHOPCA Pathology Working Group.Journal of global oncology · 2018Review
- Soft Tissue Tumor Immunohistochemistry Update: Illustrative Examples of Diagnostic Pearls to Avoid Pitfalls.Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
After ~30 years of widespread usage, immunohistochemistry (IHC) has become a standard method of diagnosis for surgical pathology. Because of the plethora of diagnoses and often subtle nature of diagnostic criteria, IHC finds particular utility in soft tissue tumors. The use of progressively small amounts of tissue for diagnosis highlights the importance of this method. The sensitivity and crispness of IHC stains have progressively improved with the advent of new techniques. Traditionally, IHC detects cell-typic markers that characterize cell phenotypes, such as chromogranin for neuroectodermal tissue, myogenin for skeletal muscle, and cytokeratin for epithelium. However, the advent of genetic discoveries have led to IHC testing for detection of fusion gene products or overexpressed oncogenes associated with deletions and mutations. Proliferation-based markers such as Ki-67 can also be used for prognosis and grading, but more standardization is needed. Development of monoclonal antibody-based pharmaceuticals, such as imatinib or crizotinib, holds the promise of tailored anticancer therapy. IHC thus has assumed importance not only for diagnosis but also for guidance of personalized medicine.
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.