ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2020
Clinical meaning of the World Health Organization morphologic classification (flat
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Giant Gallbladder Tumor, Unusual Cancer-Case Report and Short Review of Literature.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the World Health Organization (WHO) classification, gallbladder (GB) intraepithelial lesions are grouped as flat or tumoral, according to their morphological features. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the morphologies and clinical features of GB cancer (GBC) and to examine the feasibility of using morphologic classification as a prognostic factor.
methodsFrom January 2000 to December 2012, the available pathologic slide reviews of 381 patients were analyzed at the Seoul National University Hospital. All pathologic slides were evaluated by two pancreato-biliary tract pathology experts. GBCs were categorized into eight groups (Flat: F1-2, Borderline, Tumoral: Tu1-5), according to the thickness of the mucosal lesion, histologic patterns of the mucosa under microscopy, invasion extent, and patient history of premalignant lesions. According to the morphologic classification, clinical features were compared and survival analysis was performed.
resultsIn three groups, flat lesions comprised 179 (46.9%) cases and borderline and tumoral comprised 97 (25.4%) and 105 (27.5%) cases, respectively. More favorable pathologic and clinical results were found within the tumoral group. The borderline group had an intermediate tendency between flat and intraluminal in clinicopathologic parameters. In the curative resected T2 stage group, the borderline group demonstrated an intermediate trend compared to that of the flat and tumoral groups, but this was statistically insignificant (P=0.08).
conclusionsFlat type GBCs show worse prognosis than tumoral GBCs. The morphological classifications between flat and tumoral on the basis of 1 cm and by papillary feature is feasible. Tumor morphology can be used as a reference while deciding the treatment plan, especially in T2 GBC.
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.