Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33670699›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

The Role of the Pathologist in the Next-Generation Era of Tumor Molecular Characterization.

Valentina Angerilli, Francesca Galuppini, Fabio Pagni, Nicola Fusco, Umberto Malapelle, Matteo Fassan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Liquid biopsy in solid tumours: expert opinion paper of the European society of pathology.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Internal Overview of Prostatic Cancer Cases and Quality ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  14. Precision Medicine in Cytopathology.Surgical pathology clinics · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Valentina AngerilliDepartment of Medicine (DIMED), Surgical Pathology Unit, University of Padua, 35121 Padua, Italy.
Francesca GaluppiniDepartment of Medicine (DIMED), Surgical Pathology Unit, University of Padua, 35121 Padua, Italy.
Fabio PagniDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Pathology, San Gerardo Hospital, University of Milano-Bicocca, 20900 Monza, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9625-1637
Nicola FuscoDivision of Pathology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20122 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9101-9131
Umberto MalapelleDepartment of Public Health, University of Naples Federico II, 80138 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3211-9957
Matteo FassanDepartment of Medicine (DIMED), Surgical Pathology Unit, University of Padua, 35121 Padua, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6515-5482

Funding

Italian Health Ministry NET-2016-02363853
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current pathology practice is being shaped by the increasing complexity of modern medicine, in particular of precision oncology, and major technological advances. In the "next-generation technologies era", the pathologist has become the person responsible for the integration and interpretation of morphologic and molecular information and for the delivery of critical answers to diagnostic, prognostic and predictive queries, acquiring a prominent position in the molecular tumor boards.

Indexed as

molecular pathologynext generation technologiesoncologypredictive biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID33670699
PMCPMC7922586

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.