ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2015
The Diagnosis of Choriocarcinoma in Molar Pregnancies: A Revised Approach in Clinical Testing.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Paternal uniparental isodisomy of tyrosine hydroxylase locus at chromosome 11p15.4: spectrum of phenotypical presentations simulating hydatidiform moles.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2019Article
- Heterotopic atypical trophoblasts mimicking ectopic choriocarcinoma coexistent with a viable intrauterine pregnancy: A diagnostic dilemma.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHydatidiform moles occur in approximately 1 in 1,500 pregnancies; however, early miscarriages or spontaneous abortions may not be correctly identified as molar pregnancies due to poor differentiation of chorionic villi.
methodsThe current clinical testing algorithm used for the detection of hydatidiform moles uses a combination of morphological analysis and p57 immunostaining followed by ploidy testing to establish a diagnosis of either a complete or partial molar pregnancy. We review here 198 referrals for fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) ploidy testing, where the initial diagnosis based on morphology is compared to the final diagnosis based on a combination of morphology, FISH and p57 immunohistochemical (IHC) staining.
resultsApproximately 40% of cases were determined to be genetically abnormal, but only 28.8% of cases were diagnosed as molar pregnancies. The underestimation of complete molar pregnancies and those with androgenetic inheritance was also found to be likely using conventional diagnostic methods, as atypical p57 staining was observed in approximately 10% of cases.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that a revised approach to testing products of conception is necessary, with cases screened according to their clinical history in order to distinguish molar pregnancy referrals from hydropic pregnancies.
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.