ReviewThe American journal of case reports2018
Unusual Sites of High-Grade Neuroendocrine Carcinomas: A Case Series and Review of the Literature.
Review in The American journal of case reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intracranial neuroendocrine carcinoma with coexisting pituitary adenoma: a case report and comprehensive literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- YAP1 Status Defines Two Intrinsic Subtypes of LCNEC with Distinct Molecular Features and Therapeutic Vulnerabilities.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024Article
- Review
- Transduodenal resection of periampullary neuroendocrine tumor: A case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Article
- Pan-cancer Convergence to a Small-Cell Neuroendocrine Phenotype that Shares Susceptibilities with Hematological Malignancies.Cancer cell · 2019Article
- Analysis of B-ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound characteristics of different hepatic neuroendocrine neoplasm.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) encompass a diverse group of varying clinicopathological entities arising from cells of the endocrine and nervous systems. The presentation of these unique tumors can range from occult disease discovered incidentally to hyperactive, metastatic secretory tumors. NETs most commonly originate in the gastrointestinal and respiratory tract, although they may occur at any site in the body due to the wide distribution of neuroendocrine cells. Their classification system is complex and continues to evolve, and the current system uses histological grade in defining these subtypes. Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs), or high-grade, poorly-differentiated NETs, are the most aggressive subtype. Surgical resection remains the primary treatment modality and may be curative, thus early diagnosis is paramount. Management of advanced NETs remains both a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge; however, advances in our understanding of these unique neoplasms as well as an evolving classification system has led to the development of adjunctive therapeutic approaches aimed to minimize morbidity and improve patient outcomes. CASE REPORT We present 6 cases of unusual sites of high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas involving the cervix, gallbladder, oesophagus, ovary, prostate, and urinary bladder. CONCLUSIONS Our case series highlights the heterogenous and aggressive nature of this subtype of NETs as well as their diagnostic and therapeutic difficulties. We also review the evolution of the NET classification system and its impact on the management of these malignancies.
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.