Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30059451›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists2019

Tubo-Ovarian Transitional Cell Carcinoma and High-grade Serous Carcinoma Show Subtly Different Immunohistochemistry Profiles.

Jamie Magrill, Anthony N Karnezis, Basile Tessier-Cloutier, Aline Talhouk, Stefan Kommoss, Dawn Cochrane, Christine Chow, Angela Cheng, Robert Soslow, Steffen Hauptmann and 5 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. A Comprehensive Review of Ovarian Serous Carcinoma.Advances in anatomic pathology · 2019
    Review
  7. Review
  8. 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

15 authors.

Jamie MagrillBritish Columbia Cancer Agency (J.M., A.N.K., A.T., D.C., D.G.H.) Department of Pathology, University of British Columbia (A.N.K., B.T.-C., C.C., A.C., C.B.G., D.G.H.), Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York (R.S.) Department of Pathology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands (S.H.) Department of Women's Health, Tübingen University Hospital, Tübingen (S.K.) Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen (A.D.B.) Gynecologic Oncology Center, Kiel (J.P.) Institute of Pathology, Friedrichshafen (F.K.), Germany.
Anthony N Karnezis
Basile Tessier-Cloutier
Aline Talhouk
Stefan Kommoss
Dawn Cochrane
Christine Chow
Angela Cheng
Robert Soslow
Steffen Hauptmann
Andreas du Bois
Jacobus Pfisterer
C Blake Gilks
David G Huntsman
Friedrich Kommoss

Funding

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

Abstract

Tubo-ovarian transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) is grouped with high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) in the current World Health Organization classification. TCC is associated with BRCA mutations and a better prognosis compared with HGSC. Previous papers examining the immunohistochemical features of TCC have studied limited numbers of samples. No marker reflecting the biological difference between TCC and HGSC is known. We collected a large cohort of TCC to determine whether TCC and HGSC could be distinguished by immunohistochemistry. A tissue microarray was built from 89 TCC and a control cohort of 232 conventional HGSC. Immunohistochemistry was performed, scored, and statistically analyzed for routine markers of HGSC and urothelial tumors: PAX8, WT1, p53, p16, ER, p63, and GATA3. Using scoring cutoffs commonly employed in clinical practice, the immunohistochemical profile of TCC was indistinguishable from HGSC for all markers. However, more detailed scoring criteria revealed statistically significant differences between the 2 groups of tumors with respect to ER, PAX8, and WT1. HGSC showed more diffuse and intense staining for PAX8 (P=0.004 and 0.001, respectively) and WT1 (P=0.002 and 0.002, respectively); conversely, TCC showed more intense staining for ER (P=0.007). TCC and HGSC therefore show subtle differences in their immunohistochemical profiles which might reflect underlying (epi)genetic differences. Further studies using proteomic analysis will focus on the identification of differentially expressed proteins that might serve as markers of TCC-like differentiation, which could help explain biologic differences between TCC and HGSC and might identify other cases of HGSC with a better prognosis.

Indexed as

ProteomicsBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Transitional CellCohort StudiesFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryNeoplasm ProteinsOvarian NeoplasmsTissue Array AnalysisBiomarkers, TumorNeoplasm Proteins

Identifiers

PMID30059451
PMCPMC8215645

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.