Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33433883›Full record

ReviewEndocrine pathology2021

Genomics and Epigenomics of Pituitary Tumors: What Do Pathologists Need to Know?

Sylvia L Asa, Ozgur Mete, Shereen Ezzat

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Endocrine pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Pituitary neuroendocrine tumors: a model for neuroendocrine tumor classification.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2021
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Sylvia L AsaDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. pathlady01@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8418-5054
Ozgur MeteDepartment of Pathology, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Shereen EzzatDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
University Health Network · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Molecular pathology has advanced our understanding of many tumors and offers opportunities to identify novel therapies. In the pituitary, the field has uncovered several genetic mutations that predispose to pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNET) development, including MEN1, CDKN1B, PRKRIα, AIP, GPR101, and other more rare events; however, these genes are only rarely mutated in sporadic PitNETs. Recurrent genetic events in sporadic PitNETs include GNAS mutations in a subset of somatotroph tumors and ubiquitin-specific peptidase mutations (e.g., USP8, USP48) in some corticotroph tumors; to date, neither of these has resulted in altered management, and instead, the prognosis and management of PitNETs still rely more on cell type and subtype as well as local growth that determines surgical resectability. In contrast, craniopharyngiomas have either CTNNB1 or BRAF

Indexed as

EpigenomicsGenomicsEpigenesis, GeneticHumansPituitary NeoplasmsCraniopharyngiomaEpigeneticsMutationPituicytomaPituitary blastomaPituitary neuroendocrine tumor

Identifiers

PMID33433883
OpenAlexW3119830444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.