ArticleDiagnostic pathology2020
Analysis of lung biopsies using the 2015 WHO criteria and detection of sensitizing mutations--a single-institution experience of 5032 cases.
Article in 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Prognostic value of the immunohistochemistry markers CD56, TTF-1, synaptophysin, CEA, EMA and NSE in surgically resected lung carcinoid tumors.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2022Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA specialized classification for small biopsies was added to the 2015 WHO classification of lung tumors. The purpose of this study is to explore and summarize the experience of applying the newly proposed classifications and criteria to clinical practice.
methodsWe used the 2015 WHO criteria to sort out 5032 small lung biopsies from a group of Chinese patients, and demonstrated their clinicopathological features, mutational status and the relationship between these factors.
resultsThe most common diagnosis was primary lung carcinoma (3130, 62.2%), among which adenocarcinoma (1421, 28.2%) was the most frequent histological type. The mutational assays using ARMS-PCR technology demonstrated that EGFR was positive in 56.1% cases(499/889, from adenocarcinoma and NSCC, favor adenocarcinoma), ALK in 5.7% cases(12/211, from NSCC, which comprised all the primary lung carcinomas except small cell carcinomas), and ROS1 in 0.9% cases(2/211, from NSCC). Another 898 NSCC specimens went through an immunohistochemical (IHC) examination for ALK (D5F3) and 38 of them were positive (4.2%). The overall mutation rate of ALK was 4.5% (50/1119). There was no significant difference between ARMS-PCR and immunohistochemistry in the positive rate of ALK mutation detection (P = 0.359). EGFR mutations (P = 0.02) and ALK mutations (P < 0.001) both decreased with an increasing patient age. Furthermore, the amount of EGFR mutations was higher in adenocarcinoma (64.1% vs 34.1%, P < 0.001) than in NSCC, favor adenocarcinoma. In contrast, ALK mutations were more common in NSCC, favor adenocarcinoma (4.2% vs 8.4%, P = 0.021).
conclusionsThis single-center study exhibited a large subset of small lung biopsies from a Chinese institution and demonstrated that applying the 2015 WHO classification for small lung biopsies can help predict the mutational status of primary lung carcinomas.
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.