Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27032689›Full record

ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2016

A protein and mRNA expression-based classification of gastric cancer.

Namrata Setia, Agoston T Agoston, Hye S Han, John T Mullen, Dan G Duda, Jeffrey W Clark, Vikram Deshpande, Mari Mino-Kenudson, Amitabh Srivastava, Jochen K Lennerz and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

85 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. [SARIFA-a new multi-entity biomarker].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Cancers · 2024
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

25 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

13 authors.

Namrata SetiaPathology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Agoston T AgostonDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Hye S HanPathology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
John T MullenDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Dan G DudaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Jeffrey W ClarkDepartment of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Vikram DeshpandePathology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Mari Mino-KenudsonPathology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Amitabh SrivastavaDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Jochen K LennerzPathology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Theodore S HongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Eunice L KwakDepartment of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Gregory Y LauwersPathology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The overall survival of gastric carcinoma patients remains poor despite improved control over known risk factors and surveillance. This highlights the need for new classifications, driven towards identification of potential therapeutic targets. Using sophisticated molecular technologies and analysis, three groups recently provided genetic and epigenetic molecular classifications of gastric cancer (The Cancer Genome Atlas, 'Singapore-Duke' study, and Asian Cancer Research Group). Suggested by these classifications, here, we examined the expression of 14 biomarkers in a cohort of 146 gastric adenocarcinomas and performed unsupervised hierarchical clustering analysis using less expensive and widely available immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization. Ultimately, we identified five groups of gastric cancers based on Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) positivity, microsatellite instability, aberrant E-cadherin, and p53 expression; the remaining cases constituted a group characterized by normal p53 expression. In addition, the five categories correspond to the reported molecular subgroups by virtue of clinicopathologic features. Furthermore, evaluation between these clusters and survival using the Cox proportional hazards model showed a trend for superior survival in the EBV and microsatellite-instable related adenocarcinomas. In conclusion, we offer as a proposal a simplified algorithm that is able to reproduce the recently proposed molecular subgroups of gastric adenocarcinoma, using immunohistochemical and in situ hybridization techniques.

Indexed as

Microsatellite InstabilityAgedAge FactorsBiomarkers, TumorCadherinsFemaleHerpesvirus 4, HumanHumansImmunohistochemistryIn Situ HybridizationMaleMiddle AgedStomach NeoplasmsTumor Suppressor Protein p53Biomarkers, TumorCadherinsTumor Suppressor Protein p53

Identifiers

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.