ArticleJCO precision oncology2020
Development of a DNA Methylation-Based Diagnostic Signature to Distinguish Benign Oncocytoma From Renal Cell Carcinoma.
Article in JCO precision oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genomic and Epigenomic Signatures Can Distinguish Aggressive Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma from Indolent Renal Oncocytic Tumors in Clinical-grade Samples.European urology oncology · 2025Article
- DNA Methylation-Based Classification of Kidney Neoplasms.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Augmented Advancements in the Diagnostic Challenges Within Renal Cell Carcinoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Microfluidics and molecular diagnostics in renal cell carcinoma: advances, challenges, and future directions.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Empowering Renal Cancer Management with AI and Digital Pathology: Pathology, Diagnostics and Prognosis.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Accurate detection of benign and malignant renal tumor subtypes with MethylBoostER: An epigenetic marker-driven learning framework.Science advances · 2022Article
- Artificial intelligence for renal cancer: From imaging to histology and beyond.Asian journal of urology · 2022Review
- Development of a Single Molecule Counting Assay to Differentiate Chromophobe Renal Cancer and Oncocytoma in Clinics.Cancers · 2022Article
- Surveillance for low-risk kidney cancer: a narrative review of contemporary worldwide practices.Translational andrology and urology · 2021Review
- The Role of Epigenetics in the Progression of Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma and the Basis for Future Epigenetic Treatments.Cancers · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeA challenge in the diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is to distinguish chromophobe RCC (chRCC) from benign renal oncocytoma, because these tumor types are histologically and morphologically similar, yet they require different clinical management. Molecular biomarkers could provide a way of distinguishing oncocytoma from chRCC, which could prevent unnecessary treatment of oncocytoma. Such biomarkers could also be applied to preoperative biopsy specimens such as needle core biopsy specimens, to avoid unnecessary surgery of oncocytoma.
methodsWe profiled DNA methylation in fresh-frozen oncocytoma and chRCC tumors and adjacent normal tissue and used machine learning to identify a signature of differentially methylated cytosine-phosphate-guanine sites (CpGs) that robustly distinguish oncocytoma from chRCC.
resultsUnsupervised clustering of Stanford and preexisting RCC data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) revealed that of all RCC subtypes, oncocytoma is most similar to chRCC. Unexpectedly, however, oncocytoma features more extensive, overall abnormal methylation than does chRCC. We identified 79 CpGs with large methylation differences between oncocytoma and chRCC. A diagnostic model trained on 30 CpGs could distinguish oncocytoma from chRCC in 10-fold cross-validation (area under the receiver operating curve [AUC], 0.96 (95% CI, 0.88 to 1.00)) and could distinguish TCGA chRCCs from an independent set of oncocytomas from a previous study (AUC, 0.87). This signature also separated oncocytoma from other RCC subtypes and normal tissue, revealing it as a standalone diagnostic biomarker for oncocytoma.
conclusionThis CpG signature could be developed as a clinical biomarker to support differential diagnosis of oncocytoma and chRCC in surgical samples. With improved biopsy techniques, this signature could be applied to preoperative biopsy specimens.
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.