Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28786880›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of surgical pathology2018

Criteria for Risk Stratification of Vulvar and Vaginal Smooth Muscle Tumors: An Evaluation of 71 Cases Comparing Proposed Classification Systems.

Sadia Sayeed, Deyin Xing, Sarah M Jenkins, Paul S Weisman, Darya Buehler, Laura Warmke, Cora Uram-Tuculescu, Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez, Brooke E Howitt, Cherise Cortese and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of surgical pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. PDGFB Rearrangements in Dermatofibrosarcoma Protuberans of the Vulva: A Study of 11 Cases Including Myxoid and Fibrosarcomatous Variants.International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists · 2018
    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

12 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Sadia SayeedDepartments of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology.
Deyin XingDepartment of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD.
Sarah M JenkinsHealth Sciences Research.
Paul S WeismanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Darya BuehlerDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Laura WarmkeDepartment of Pathology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.
Cora Uram-TuculescuDepartment of Pathology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.
Jamie N Bakkum-GamezObstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Brooke E HowittDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Cherise CorteseDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.
Kay J ParkDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
J Kenneth SchoolmeesterDepartments of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USVirginia Commonwealth University · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USJohns Hopkins Hospital · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USMayo Clinic in Florida · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate risk stratification of smooth muscle tumors (SMTs) is essential for appropriate patient management. Yet, the rarity of SMTs of the vagina and vulva makes development of a prognostically meaningful classification system challenging. While 2 classification methods for vulvar SMTs and 1 for vaginal SMTs have been proposed, it is our experience that many pathologists tend to apply criteria for uterine SMTs when evaluating vulvovaginal tumors. We retrospectively reviewed a large cohort of vulvovaginal SMTs with clinical follow-up and evaluated which method most accurately classified tumors according to patient outcome. A total of 71 tumors, 53 vaginal (75%) and 18 vulvar (25%), from 71 patients were identified. All tumors were centrally examined for degree of cytologic atypia, morphology (spindled, epithelioid, myxoid), mitotic index per 10 high power fields, atypical mitotic figures, tumor cell necrosis, ischemic necrosis, tumor interface (circumscribed or infiltrative) and margin status. Clinical features were recorded for each patient. Follow-up was available for 63 patients (89%), and ranged from 1 to 234 months (median: 64 mo). While site-specific and uterine criteria showed equally excellent sensitivity in classifying smooth muscle neoplasms as leiomyosarcoma according to patient outcome, uterine criteria showed improved specificity relatively to site-specific methods in classifying tumors as nonsarcoma according to patient outcome. We recommend that uterine SMT criteria and nomenclature be adopted for evaluation and classification of vulvovaginal SMTs.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentSmooth Muscle TumorVaginal NeoplasmsVulvar NeoplasmsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID28786880
PMCPMC5730467
OpenAlexW2744008632

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.