ArticleCancer medicine2016
Pathology of healing: what else might we look at?
Article in Cancer medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decoding tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma in situ: immune microenvironment dynamics and prognostic insights.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- High-Grade Ductal CarcinomaEuropean journal of breast health · 2023Article
- Characterization of the relationship between FLI1 and immune infiltrate level in tumour immune microenvironment for breast cancer.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2020Article
- Associations in tumor infiltrating lymphocytes between clinicopathological factors and clinical outcomes in estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 negative breast cancer.Oncology letters · 2019Article
- Pathology of healing: what else might we look at?Cancer medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several aspects of the article by Morita et al. (Cancer Medicine 5:1607-18, 2016), examining the spontaneous healing phenomenon with reference to tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), require clarification. The concept of "healing", which can perhaps be more accurately termed "regressive change", remains controversial due to a lack of concrete evidence. Since regressive change is characterized by fibrosis and lymphocytes, a cancer nest that appears to lack a distinct basement membrane, surrounded only by lymphocytes, as in Morita et al's Figure 2F, should be meticulously examined because the appearance may correspond to a tumor having just completed the process of invasion. In our experience, a layer of myoepithelial cells in such foci is often difficult to detect even with immunohistochemistry. Thus, we suggest evaluating the viability of cancer cells within the nest by employing several markers, such as Ki67 and apoptotic markers, to judge whether the tumor is intraductal. It might also be useful to compare cases with versus without regressive change to elucidate the biology of such tumors. For these reasons, a tumor, floating within a pool of TILs and lacking obvious fibrous bands, might be an interesting material to examine in future studies.
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.