Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26943800›Full record

ReviewTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2016

Treatment of lung large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma.

Giuseppe Lo Russo, Sara Pusceddu, Claudia Proto, Marianna Macerelli, Diego Signorelli, Milena Vitali, Monica Ganzinelli, Rosaria Gallucci, Nicoletta Zilembo, Marco Platania and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Advances in combined neuroendocrine carcinoma of lung cancer.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Giuseppe Lo RussoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy. giuseppe.lorusso@istitutotumori.mi.it.
Sara PuscedduDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Claudia ProtoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Marianna MacerelliDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Diego SignorelliDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Milena VitaliDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Monica GanzinelliDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Rosaria GallucciDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Nicoletta ZilemboDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Marco PlataniaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Roberto BuzzoniDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Filippo de BraudDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Marina Chiara GarassinoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, Milano, Italy.
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lung large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (L-LCNEC) is a rare, aggressive, and difficult-to-treat tumor. It is classified as a neuroendocrine subtype of large cell lung carcinoma (LCLC) belonging to the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) group, but it is also included in the neuroendocrine tumor (NET) group. Most of the available data related to its treatment derive from retrospective analyses or small case series. For patients with L-LCNEC, prognosis is generally very poor. In early stages (I-II-III), surgery is recommended but does not seem to be sufficient. Platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy may be useful while the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is still not well defined. In patients with advanced L-LCNEC, the chemotherapy regimens used in SCLC still remain the standard of treatment, but results are not satisfactory. Due to their peculiar clinical and biological features and the lack of literature data, there is an emerging need for a consensus on the best treatment strategy for L-LCNEC and for the identification of new therapeutic options. In this review, we will discuss the key aspects of L-LCNEC management with the aim to clarify the most controversial issues.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinoma, Large CellCarcinoma, NeuroendocrineChemotherapy, AdjuvantHumansLung NeoplasmsPrognosisChemotherapyLarge cell neuroendocrine carcinomaLung neuroendocrine tumorTreatment options

Identifiers

PMID26943800
OpenAlexW2290938344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.