ArticleHistopathology2019
Colorectal metastasis to the gallbladder mimicking a primary gallbladder malignancy: histopathological and molecular characteristics.
Article in Histopathology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metastatic Colon Cancer Presenting as Gallbladder Perforation: Highlighting the Diagnostic Challenges and Clinical Implications.ACG case reports journal · 2023Article
- Diatom-Based Nanomedicine for Colorectal Cancer Treatment: New Approaches for Old Challenges.Marine drugs · 2023Review
- Comprehensive clinicopathological and genomic profiling of gallbladder cancer reveals actionable targets in half of patients.NPJ precision oncology · 2022Article
- Unraveling Neuroendocrine Gallbladder Cancer: Comprehensive Clinicopathologic and Molecular Characterization.JCO precision oncology · 2021Article
- Colorectal metastasis to the gallbladder mimicking a primary gallbladder malignancy: histopathological and molecular characteristics.Histopathology · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsOutcomes of colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment and survival have steadily improved during the past decades, accompanied by an increased risk of developing second primary tumours and metastatic tumours at unusual sites. Metastatic CRC can show mucosal colonisation, thereby mimicking a second primary tumour. This potential confusion could lead to incorrect diagnosis and consequently inadequate treatment of the patient. The aim of this study was to differentiate between metastatic CRC and a second primary (gallbladder cancer, GBC) using a combination of standard histopathology and molecular techniques. METHODS AND
resultsTen consecutive patients with both CRC and GBC were identified in our region using the Dutch National Pathology Archive (PALGA). Two patients served as negative controls. Histology of GBC was reviewed by nine pathologists. A combination of immunohistochemistry, microsatellite analysis, genomewide DNA copy number analysis and targeted somatic mutation analysis was used to aid in differential diagnosis. In two patients, CRC and GBC were clonally related, as confirmed by somatic mutation analysis. For one case, this was confirmed by genomewide DNA copy number analysis. However, in both cases, pathologists initially considered the GBC as a second primary tumour.
conclusionsMetastatic CRC displaying mucosal colonisation is often misinterpreted as a second primary tumour. A combination of traditional histopathology and molecular techniques improves this interpretation, and lowers the risk of inadequate treatment.
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.