ReviewDer Pathologe2016
[Oncocytoma versus chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: Is there something in between?].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2016. 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.
- Subtyping atypical eosinophilic renal cell tumours through integrated morphological, immunohistochemical, and mutational characters.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma - a rare kidney cancer with limited therapy options: a narrative review.BMC urology · 2025Review
- Mass Spectrometry Imaging Differentiates Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma and Renal Oncocytoma with High Accuracy.Journal of Cancer · 2020Article
- Biomarkers of Renal Tumors: the Current State and Clinical Perspectives.Current urology reports · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The differentiation of oncocytic tumors of the kidneys is often difficult, particularly in renal biopsies. Differential diagnoses are chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC), renal oncocytoma (RO), the oncocytic variant of papillary renal cell carcinoma (OPRCC), the eosinophilic variant of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC) and hybrid oncocytic chromophobe tumors (HOCT). In difficult cases that cannot be resolved by morphology alone, immunohistochemistry is usually helpful. The RO and ChRCC show positive reactions for CD117, they are negative for vimentin and alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase (AMACR), while CCRCC are positive for vimentin and OPRCC are positive for AMACR. To distinguish between RO and ChRCC, CK7, claudin-7 (both strongly positive in ChRCC and negative or patchy positive in RO) and epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) can be used (positive in ChRCC, negative in RO); however, a diagnosis may remain difficult in some cases even with the use of immunohistochemistry. Thus, numerous new methods are being developed in the field of molecular pathology and computer-based morphometric tumor analysis; however, these new methods have not yet been applied in routine diagnostics.
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.