Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29212159›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2017

LEF1, TFE3, and AR are putative diagnostic markers of solid pseudopapillary neoplasms.

Eun Kyung Kim, Mi Jang, Minhee Park, Hoguen Kim

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm of the pancreas: A case report.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Lymphoid enhancer-binding factor 1 (LEF1): a reliable immunohistochemical predictive marker for WNT-activated medulloblastoma.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Molecular Diagnosis of Cystic Neoplasms of the Pancreas: a Review.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Review
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eun Kyung KimDepartment of Pathology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Mi JangDepartment of Pathology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Minhee ParkDepartments of Pathology and Brain, Korea 21 PLUS Project for Medical Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Hoguen KimDepartment of Pathology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Yonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnosis of solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs) is challenging because some SPNs share many similar morphological and immunohistochemical features with other pancreatic neoplasms. In this study, we investigated potential diagnostic markers of SPN. Based on the SPN-specific upregulated genes from a previous DNA microarray and proteome study, we selected six immunohistochemical markers [beta-catenin, androgen receptor (AR), lymphoid enhancer-binding factor 1 (LEF1), transcription factor for immunoglobulin heavy-chain enhancer 3 (TFE3), fused in sarcoma (FUS), and WNT inhibitory factor 1 (WIF-1)]. We also evaluated the Ki-67 proliferative index to investigate its associations with prognosis. To validate these markers, we studied 91 SPNs as well as 51 pancreatic ductal carcinomas (PDC) and 48 neuroendocrine tumors (NET) as controls. We found frequent and diffuse nuclear expressions of β-catenin (98.9%), AR (81.3%), LEF1 (93.4%), TFE3 (74.7%), FUS (84.6%), and cytoplasmic expression of WIF-1 (96.7%) in SPNs. In contrast, PDCs and NETs showed no expression. (

Indexed as

androgen receptorKi-67lymphoid enhancer-binding factor 1Pathology Sectionsolid pseudopapillary neoplasmtranscription factor for immunoglobulin heavy-chain enhancer 3

Identifiers

PMID29212159
PMCPMC5706805
OpenAlexW2766354047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.