ArticleEndocrine2016
Can PPH3 be helpful to assess the discordant grade in primary and metastatic enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors?
Article in Endocrine, 2016. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A real-life treatment cohort of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: High-grade increase in metastases confers poor survival.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Therapeutic strategy in neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is based on histological characteristics of the primary tumor (PT), even in case of metastatic disease. Our aim was to compare the tumor grade between PT and their liver metastases (LM) in patients with enteropancreatic NETs. Forty-one patients treated for sporadic NETs (10 pancreatic, 31 intestinal) were included. All presented synchronous (35) or metachronous (6) LM. Tumor grade was evaluated for PT and LM according to the WHO classification, using Ki-67 labeling and mitotic count (MC) evaluated with or without phospho-histone H3 (PPH3). Tumor grade differed between primary and metastatic tumor in 16/41 patients (39 %), with an increase of grade in 13 of them (32 %). The median Ki-67, MC, and PPH3 in metastases were statistically higher than in PT (p = 0.0002, 0.02, and 0.01). In 17 of 65 cases tested with PPH3 (26 %), this antibody was more efficient in assessing the grade compared to the usual MC, and in 2/65 cases compared to the Ki-67. A better correlation was observed between Ki-67 and PPH3 (p = 0.0001) than between Ki-67 and MC without immunohistochemistry. There is a significant difference in tumor grade between primary and metastatic NETs, underlining the necessity of a systematic biopsy on LM for patient management. Moreover, PPH3 appears to be a powerful antibody to assess the MC and the tumor grade much more accurately when associated with Ki-67.
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.