Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31361605›Full record

ArticleApplied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM2020

Napsin-A and AMACR are Superior to HNF-1β in Distinguishing Between Mesonephric Carcinomas and Clear Cell Carcinomas of the Gynecologic Tract.

Jennifer Pors, Sheila Segura, Angela Cheng, Jennifer X Ji, Basile Tessier-Cloutier, Dawn Cochrane, Daniel J Fix, Kay Park, Blake Gilks, Lynn Hoang

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Controversies in the Management of Mesonephric and Mesonephric-Like Adenocarcinomas of the Female Genital Tract.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jennifer PorsDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Vancouver General Hospital.
Sheila SeguraMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Angela ChengGenetic Pathology Evaluation Center.
Jennifer X JiDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Vancouver General Hospital.
Basile Tessier-CloutierDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Vancouver General Hospital.
Dawn CochraneDepartment of Molecular Oncology, British Columbia Cancer Research Centre, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Daniel J FixMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Kay ParkMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Blake GilksDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Vancouver General Hospital.
Lynn HoangDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Vancouver General Hospital.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USUniversity of British Columbia · CAVancouver General Hospital · CA

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

Mesonephric carcinoma is a rare gynecologic neoplasm commonly mistaken for clear cell carcinoma, because of their overlapping morphologic features. Both tumors are negative for estrogen receptor and p16, magnifying this diagnostic dilemma. Recently, hepatocyte nuclear factor-1 beta (HNF-1β), a marker for clear cell carcinoma, has also been shown to be positive in mesonephric carcinomas. Other more recent markers for clear cell carcinoma, however, such as Napsin-A and alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase (AMACR), have not yet been studied in mesonephric carcinomas. Here we examine HNF-1β, AMACR, and Napsin-A immunohistochemistry in 18 mesonephric and 55 endometrial/cervical clear cell carcinomas. HNF-1β was considered positive if nuclear staining was present in ≥70% of cells and at least moderate intensity; for Napsin-A and AMACR, any cytoplasmic staining was considered positive (≥1%). H-scores were determined by multiplying the intensity score by proportion score. HNF-1β was positive in a substantial portion of mesonephric carcinomas (9/18, 50%; H-score 98) and clear cell carcinomas (34/55, 62%; H-score 163) and did not distinguish between the 2 entities (specificity, 50%; P-value of H-score=0.08). Napsin-A and AMACR expression was significantly higher in clear cell [43/55 (78%) and 41/55 (75%), respectively] than mesonephric carcinomas [4/18 (22%) and 4/18 (22%) respectively], and helpful in this differential (specificity: 78% and 78%; P<0.05 for both). When Napsin-A and AMACR staining were seen in mesonephric carcinomas, staining was focal (≤5%), whereas staining in clear cell carcinomas was patchy/diffuse. In summary, Napsin-A and AMACR are helpful in distinguishing mesonephric carcinomas from clear cell carcinomas of the female genital tract, but HNF-1β is not.

Indexed as

Adenocarcinoma, Clear CellAdultAgedAspartic Acid EndopeptidasesCohort StudiesEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleHepatocyte Nuclear Factor 1-betaHumansImmunohistochemistryMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRacemases and EpimerasesTissue Array AnalysisUterine Cervical Neoplasmsalpha-methylacyl-CoA racemaseAspartic Acid EndopeptidasesHepatocyte Nuclear Factor 1-betaNAPSA protein, humanRacemases and Epimerases

Identifiers

PMID31361605
PMCPMC6987010
OpenAlexW2965610356

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.