ReviewAnnals of diagnostic pathology2020
American Registry of Pathology Expert Opinions: Evaluation of poorly differentiated malignant neoplasms on limited samples - Gastrointestinal mucosal biopsies.
Review in Annals of diagnostic pathology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiple small intestinal metastatic tumours: from basics to advanced testing.Oxford medical case reports · 2026Article
- Highly proliferative anal neuroendocrine carcinoma: molecular and clinical features of a rare, recurrent case in complete remission.BMC gastroenterology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This review reflects a collaboration between the American Registry of Pathology (the publisher of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Fascicles) and Annals of Diagnostic Pathology. It is part of a series of expert recommendations on topics encountered in daily practice. The authors, three pathologists with expertise in gastrointestinal tract pathology and immunohistochemistry, met on 30 July 2019 tasked with developing expert recommendations for evaluating poorly differentiated and undifferentiated malignant neoplasms encountered on mucosal biopsies of the gastrointestinal tract. We focused on esophageal, gastric, small intestinal, colorectal, and anal (i.e., tubal gut) samples. When faced with diagnostic uncertainty on the initial H&E, it is best to begin by trying to assign the broad tumor class with screening markers such as pankeratin, S100 protein or SOX10, and CD20 or CD45. Once a broad tumor class is established, more specific differentiation markers can be pursued (e.g., lineage-restricted transcription factors for adenocarcinoma; p40 for squamous cell carcinoma; chromogranin A and synaptophysin or INSM1 for neuroendocrine neoplasms). Every small biopsy containing tumor should be considered a potential molecular pathology sample; cutting extra unstained slides with this testing in mind is strongly encouraged.
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.