Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33377247›Full record

ArticleCancer science2021

Pathological evaluation of tumor grade for salivary adenoid cystic carcinoma: A proposal of an objective grading system.

Naruhiko Morita, Takayuki Murase, Kaori Ueda, Toshitaka Nagao, Kimihide Kusafuka, Masato Nakaguro, Makoto Urano, Ken-Ichi Taguchi, Hidetaka Yamamoto, Satoshi Kano and 14 more

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors at 17 institutions in 1 country.

Naruhiko MoritaDepartment of Pathology and Molecular Diagnostics, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya City University, Nagoya, Japan.
Takayuki MuraseDepartment of Pathology and Molecular Diagnostics, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya City University, Nagoya, Japan.
Kaori UedaDepartment of Pathology and Molecular Diagnostics, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya City University, Nagoya, Japan.
Toshitaka NagaoDepartment of Anatomic Pathology, Tokyo Medical University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Kimihide KusafukaDepartment of Pathology, Shizuoka General Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan.
Masato NakaguroDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Makoto UranoDepartment of Diagnostic Pathology, Fujita Health University, School of Medicine, Aichi, Japan.
Ken-Ichi TaguchiDepartment of Pathology, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Hidetaka YamamotoDepartment of Anatomic Pathology, Graduate of School of Medical Science, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9148-6445
Satoshi KanoDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Yuichiro TadaDepartment of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, International University of Health and Welfare, Mita Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Kiyoaki TsukaharaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
Kenji OkamiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan.
Tetsuro OnitsukaDivision of Head and Neck Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Yasushi FujimotoDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Aichi Medical University, Aichi, Japan.
Daisuke KawakitaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Japan.
Kazuo SakuraiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Fujita Health University Okazaki Medical Center, Aichi, Japan.
Toru NagaoDepartment of Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Aichi-Gakuin University, Aichi, Japan.
Nobuhiro HanaiDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Ryo KawataDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Osaka Medical College, Osaka, Japan.
Naohito HatoDepartment of Otolaryngology, Ehime University, School of Medicine, Ehime, Japan.
Naoki OtsukiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Ken-Ichi NibuDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Hiroshi InagakiDepartment of Pathology and Molecular Diagnostics, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya City University, Nagoya, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6157-636X
Nagoya City University · JPTokyo Medical University · JPFujita Health University · JPKobe University · JPAichi Cancer Center · JPAichi Gakuin University · JPAichi Medical University · JPEhime University · JPHokkaido University · JPKyushu University · JPMita Hospital · JPNagoya University Hospital · JPNational Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center · JPOsaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University · JPShizuoka Cancer Center · JPShizuoka General Hospital · JPTokai University · JP

Funding

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology 17K08746Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology 18H02633
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three pathological grading systems advocated by Perzin/Szanto, Spiro, and van Weert are currently used for adenoid cystic carcinoma (AdCC). In these systems, the amount or presence of the solid tumor component in AdCC specimens is an important index. However, the "solid tumor component" has not been well defined. Salivary AdCC cases (N = 195) were collected after a central pathology review. We introduced a novel criterion for solid tumor component, minAmax (minor axis maximum). The largest solid tumor nest in each AdCC case was histologically screened, the maximum oval fitting the solid nest was estimated, and the length of the minor axis of the oval (minAmax) was measured. The prognostic cutoff for the minAmax was determined using training and validation cohorts. All cases were evaluated for the four grading systems, and their prognostic impact and interobserver variability were examined. The cutoff value for the minAmax was set at 0.20 mm. Multivariate prognostic analyses showed the minAmax and van Weert systems to be independent prognostic tools for overall, disease-free, and distant metastasis-free survival while the Perzin/Szanto and Spiro systems were selected for overall survival but not for disease-free or distant metastasis-free survival. The highest hazard ratio for overall survival (11.9) was obtained with the minAmax system. The reproducibility of the minAmax system (kappa coefficient of 0.81) was scored as very good while those of the other three systems were scored as moderate. In conclusion, the minAmax is a simple, objective, and highly reproducible grading system useful for prognostic stratification for salivary AdCC.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, Adenoid CysticDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSalivary Gland NeoplasmsSalivary GlandsYoung Adultadenoid cystic carcinomainterobserver variabilitypathological grading systemprognosissalivary gland

Identifiers

PMID33377247
PMCPMC7935776
OpenAlexW3117437089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.