ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2020
Conjunctival 'mucoepidermoid carcinoma' revisited: a revision of terminology, based on morphologic, immunohistochemical and molecular findings of 14 cases, and the 2018 WHO Classification of Tumours of the Eye.
Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The 5th Edition of the World Health Organization Classification of Tumours of the Eye and Orbit.Ocular oncology and pathology · 2023Article
- Iodine-Oman journal of ophthalmologyArticle
- Late Metastasis in Conjunctival Adenosquamous Carcinoma.Journal of ophthalmic & vision researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2018, the consensus meeting for the WHO Classification of Tumours of the Eye decided that conjunctival mucoepidermoid carcinoma should be reclassified as adenosquamous carcinoma, as this represented a better morphological fit. To examine the applicability of this terminology, we studied the clinical, histopathological, immunohistochemical and molecular pathology of 14 cases that were originally diagnosed as conjunctival mucoepidermoid carcinoma. There were 7 (50%) females and 7 (50%) males. The median age was 64 years. The left eye was affected in 8 and the right eye in 6 patients. In-situ carcinoma was present in 11/14 (79%) cases and comprised in-situ squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and conjunctival intraepithelial neoplasia with mucinous differentiation (CIN-Muc). Invasive carcinoma was present in 11/14 (79%) cases. Group 1 (1/11 cases, 9%) comprised invasive SCC only. Group 2 (6/11 cases, 55%) comprised SCC with mucinous differentiation, manifesting as scattered intracellular mucin, occasionally together with intercellular mucin, with no evidence of true glandular differentiation. Group 3 (3/11 cases. 27%) comprised true adenosquamous carcinoma. Group 4 (1/11 cases, 9%) comprised pure adenocarcinoma. Thirteen of 14 cases (93%) underwent FISH for MAML2 translocation and none were rearranged. Two cases harboured high-risk HPV (type 16 and 18). The combined findings confirm that all lesions in our study were not mucoepidermoid carcinoma, but represented predominantly SCC with mucinous differentiation and adenosquamous carcinoma. We, therefore, recommend future revision of the WHO classification to include SCC with mucinous differentiation alongside adenosquamous carcinoma.
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.