ReviewDer Pathologe2017
[Hereditary colorectal cancer : An update on genetics and entities in terms of differential diagnosis].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2017. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current landscape of BRAF-V600E metastatic CRC management in Latin America: an expert Latin American panel's recommendations.Ecancermedicalscience · 2024Review
- [BRAF-V600E testing in metastatic colorectal cancer and new, chemotherapy-free therapy options. German version].Der Pathologe · 2021Review
- BRAF testing in metastatic colorectal carcinoma and novel, chemotherapy-free therapeutic options.Der Pathologe · 2021Review
- Hematological Malignancies in Adults With a Family Predisposition.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pathologist can contribute to recognizing hereditary causes of colorectal cancer via morphology. By identifying so-called index patients, it is possible to take preventive measures in affected families. The precise definition of the clinical presentation and the histopathological phenotype help to narrow the spectrum of expected genetic alterations. Novelties within Lynch syndrome include the recognition of EPCAM as a fifth gene locus, as well as the newly defined Lynch-like syndrome with evidence of somatic mismatch repair (MMR) mutations. With regard to polyposis-associated syndromes, the spectrum of polyps, whether serrated, hamartomatous or classic adenoma, is of crucial importance. The resulting differential diagnosis includes (attenuated) familial adenomatous polyposis ([a]FAP), MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP), polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis (PPAP), phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) hamartoma tumor syndrome (PHTS), Peutz-Jeghers syndrome and juvenile polyposis, each with a specific genetic background.
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.