ArticleDer Pathologe2019
[Neuroendocrine neoplasms : Two families with distinct features unified in one classification (German version)].
Article in Der Pathologe, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Basic science and translational implications of current knowledge on neuroendocrine tumors.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2025Review
- Gallbladder Neuroendocrine Neoplasms in Dogs and Humans.Veterinary sciences · 2024Review
- Site-specific trends in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms in Bavaria, Germany.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Neuroendocrine neoplasms of the pancreas: diagnosis and pitfalls.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Review
- Gastroenteropancreatic grade 3 neuroendocrine tumors: a single entity or a heterogeneous group? A retrospective analysis.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2022Article
- [Neuroendocrine tumors : Classification, clinical presentation and imaging].Der Radiologe · 2019Review
- [Neuroendocrine tumors of the stomach, duodenum and pancreas : Value of (hybrid) radiological diagnostics].Der Radiologe · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
All neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are characterized by the expression of synaptophysin and chromogranin A (or B). Yet, they are not a homogeneous group of tumors. Paradigmatic for these tumors are the NENs of the gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) system. Two NEN families can be distinguished: predominantly well differentiated and low-proliferative NENs, called neuroendocrine tumors (NET), and poorly differentiated and high-proliferative NENs, called neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). Based on their proliferative activity, GEP NETs are further classified into G1, G2, and G3 tumors. NECs are per definition G3 carcinomas. The morphological NEN dichotomy is supported by differences in epidemiology, genetics, clinics, and prognosis, and potentially has its cause originating from different progenitor cells. Genetically, NECs are distinguished by TP53 and RB1 alterations, which are lacking in NETs and are helpful in the distinction of NETs from NECs. Comparison of the GEP NEN WHO classification with extragastroenteropancreatic NEN classifications commonly reveal differences in terminology and categorization. In addition, they lack a grading system. However, common to all NEN classifications is the recognition of two tumor families differing in histological differentiation and prognosis. This allows the construction of a uniform classification frame for all NENs.
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.