Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29915633›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology research2018

SATB2 Shows Different Profiles Between Appendiceal Adenocarcinomas Ex Goblet Cell Carcinoids and Appendiceal/Colorectal Conventional Adenocarcinomas: An Immunohistochemical Study With Comparison to CDX2.

Chen Yang, Li Sun, Lingxin Zhang, Lixin Zhou, Dongfeng Niu, Wenfeng Cao, Zhongwu Li, Xiaozheng Huang, Qiang Kang, Lin Jia and 4 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

14 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Chen YangDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Li SunDepartment of Pathology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital (Beijing Cancer Hospital), Beijing, China.
Lingxin ZhangDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Lixin ZhouDepartment of Pathology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital (Beijing Cancer Hospital), Beijing, China.
Dongfeng NiuDepartment of Pathology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital (Beijing Cancer Hospital), Beijing, China.
Wenfeng CaoDepartment of Pathology, Tianjin Cancer Hospital, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Zhongwu LiDepartment of Pathology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital (Beijing Cancer Hospital), Beijing, China.
Xiaozheng HuangDepartment of Pathology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital (Beijing Cancer Hospital), Beijing, China.
Qiang KangDepartment of Pathology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital (Beijing Cancer Hospital), Beijing, China.
Lin JiaDepartment of Pathology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital (Beijing Cancer Hospital), Beijing, China.
Marina PlatikDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Xiuli LiuDepartment of Pathology, Immunology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Jinping LaiDepartment of Pathology, Immunology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Dengfeng CaoDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Peking University · CNWashington University in St. Louis · USPeking University Cancer Hospital · CNUniversity of Florida · USTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpecial AT-rich sequence-binding protein 2 (SATB2) is a novel marker for colorectal adenocarcinomas but little is known about its expression in appendiceal adenocarcinomas. We aim to investigate SATB2 in these tumors and colorectal adenocarcinomas with comparison to CDX2.

methodsImmunohistochemical stains for SATB2 and CDX2 were performed in 49 appendiceal adenocarcinomas (23 conventional, 26 adenocarcinoma ex goblet cell carcinoids (AdexGCCs)) and 57 colorectal adenocarcinomas. Their expression was correlated with tumor differentiation and growth patterns.

resultsSATB2 staining was positive in 26/26 (100%) appendiceal AdexGCCs and 15/23 (65%) appendiceal conventional adenocarcinomas (P = 0.001). Their mean percentage of SATB2-positive cells was 93% and 34%, respectively (P < 0.0001). CDX2 staining was seen in 26/26 (100%) AdexGCCs and 22/23 (96%) appendiceal conventional adenocarcinomas (P = 0.4694). SATB2 and CDX2 showed similar staining in AdexGCCs but CDX2 labeled more tumor cells than SATB2 in conventional adenocarcinomas (mean 84% vs. 34%, P < 0.0001). SATB2 and CDX2 staining was seen in 82% (47/57) and 96% (55/57) colorectal adenocarcinomas, respectively (P = 0.01). The mean percentage of cells positive for SATB2 and CDX2 was 48% and 91%, respectively (P < 0.00001). Decreased SATB2 immunoreactivity was associated with non-glandular differentiation particularly signet ring cells in colorectal (P = 0.001) and appendiceal conventional adenocarcinomas (P = 0.04) but not in appendiceal AdexGCCs.

conclusionsSATB2 is a highly sensitive marker for appendiceal AdexGCCs with similar sensitivity as CDX2. In colorectal and appendiceal conventional adenocarcinomas, SATB2 is not as sensitive as CDX2 and its immunoreactivity is dependent on tumor differentiation.

Indexed as

Adenocarcinoma ex goblet cell carcinoidAppendiceal adenocarcinomaCDX2Colorectal adenocarcinomaSATB2

Identifiers

PMID29915633
PMCPMC5997472
OpenAlexW2805790768

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.