Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31214492›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2019

Optimization of Window Study Endpoints in Endometrial Cancer.

Sarah J Kitson, Zoe Maskell, Vanitha N Sivalingam, Joseph Shaw, Emma J Crosbie

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 95% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah J KitsonDivision of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Zoe MaskellDivision of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Vanitha N SivalingamDivision of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Joseph ShawDepartment of Histopathology, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Emma J CrosbieDivision of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom.
St Mary's Hospital · GBUniversity of Manchester · GBManchester University NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Department of Health NIHR-CS-012-009Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pre-surgical window studies rely on the accurate quantification of biomarkers as surrogates of disease response. In endometrial cancer, this has traditionally involved comparing immunohistochemical expression in diagnostic endometrial biopsies with the post-treatment hysterectomy specimen. This strategy is at risk of generating erroneous results if significant hypoxia occurs during surgery or delays in fixation of tissues lead to protein loss. Immunohistochemical expression of commonly studied biomarkers in window studies were compared in pre-operative endometrial biopsies and hysterectomy specimens taken on the same day from 75 women with endometrial cancer enrolled in a clinical trial. Differences in expression were correlated with clinico-pathological variables and tissue handling. Expression of Ki-67, markers of the PI3K-Akt-mTOR, and insulin signaling pathways and hormone receptors was significantly lower in the hysterectomy specimen than the corresponding endometrial biopsy (all

Indexed as

biomarkerendometrial cancerexpressionoptimizationwindow study

Identifiers

PMID31214492
PMCPMC6554675
OpenAlexW2944396186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.