Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30485478›Full record

ArticleHistopathology2019

Is the sum of positive neuroendocrine immunohistochemical stains useful for diagnosis of large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) on biopsy specimens?

Jules L Derks, Anne-Marie C Dingemans, Robert-Jan van Suylen, Michael A den Bakker, Ronald A M Damhuis, Esther C van den Broek, Ernst-Jan Speel, Erik Thunnissen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Histopathology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Lung neuroendocrine neoplasms: recent progress and persistent challenges.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2022
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Jules L DerksDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, GROW school for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0442-1879
Anne-Marie C DingemansDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, GROW school for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Robert-Jan van SuylenPathology-DNA, Jeroen Bosch Hospitals', Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands.
Michael A den BakkerDepartment of Pathology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8996-3134
Ronald A M DamhuisDepartment of Research, Comprehensive Cancer Association, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Esther C van den BroekPALGA Foundation, Houten, the Netherlands.
Ernst-Jan SpeelDepartment of Pathology, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Erik ThunnissenDepartment of Pathology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Maastricht University Medical Centre · NLAmsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLErasmus MC · NLJeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis · NLNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation · NL

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding UM-2014-7110Maastricht University Medical Centre
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsPulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) is underdiagnosed on biopsy specimens. We evaluated if routine neuroendocrine immunohistochemical (IHC) stains are helpful in the diagnosis of LCNEC on biopsy specimens. METHODS AND

resultsUsing the Dutch pathology registry (PALGA), surgically resected LCNEC with matching pre-operative biopsy specimens were identified and haematoxylin and IHC slides (CD56, chromogranin-A, synaptophysin) requested. Subsequently, three pathologists assigned (1) the presence or absence of the WHO 2015 criteria and (2) cumulative size of all (biopsy) specimens. For validation, a tissue microarray (TMA) of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (n = 77) and LCNEC (n = 19) was used. LCNEC was confirmed on the resection specimens in 32 of 48 re-reviewed cases. In 47% (n = 15 of 32) LCNEC was also confirmed in the paired biopsy specimens. Neuroendocrine morphology was absent in 53% (n = 17 of 32) of paired biopsy specimens, more often when smaller amounts of tissue were available for evaluation [29% < 5 mm (n = 14) versus 67% ≥5 mm (n = 18) P = 0.04]. Combined with current WHO criteria, positive staining for greater than or equal to two of three neuroendocrine IHC markers increased the sensitivity for LCNEC from 47% to 93% on paired biopsy specimens, and further validated using an independent TMA of LCNEC and NSCLC with sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 99%, respectively.

conclusionsLCNEC is difficult to diagnose because neuroendocrine morphology is frequently absent in biopsy specimens. In NSCLC devoid of obvious morphological squamous or adenocarcinoma features, positive staining in greater than or equal to two of three neuroendocrine IHC stains supports the diagnosis of LCNEC.

Indexed as

AgedBiomarkers, TumorBiopsyCarcinoma, Large CellCarcinoma, NeuroendocrineFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesStaining and LabelingBiomarkers, Tumorbiopsy (MESH)carcinomadiagnosis (MESH)LCNEClung neoplasms (MESH)neuroendocrine (MESH)sensitivity and specificity (MESH)WHO classification

Identifiers

PMID30485478
PMCPMC6850184
OpenAlexW2902324947

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.