Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33815274›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in endocrinology2021

How to Classify and Define Pituitary Tumors: Recent Advances and Current Controversies.

Congxin Dai, Jun Kang, Xiaohai Liu, Yong Yao, Haijun Wang, Renzhi Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Congxin DaiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Jun KangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xiaohai LiuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yong YaoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Haijun WangChina Pituitary Adenoma Specialist Council, Beijing, China.
Renzhi WangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Capital Medical University · CNPeking Union Medical College Hospital · CNBeijing Tongren Hospital · CNThe First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pituitary tumors are very complex and heterogeneous and have a very wide range of proliferative and aggressive behaviors, and how to define and classify these tumors remains controversial. This review summarizes the epidemiology and progress in the classification and definition of pituitary tumors, as well as controversial issues. Based on the results of radiologic and autopsy studies, the prevalence of pituitary tumors has recently increased significantly. However, the majority of pituitary tumors are incidentally discovered and asymptomatic, and such tumors are called pituitary incidentalomas. Most of these incidentalomas do not induce symptoms, remain stable in size, and do not need treatment. The recent revised classification strategies mainly depend on immunohistochemistry (IHC) to detect pituitary hormones and pituitary transcription factors; therefore, the accuracy of diagnosing pituitary tumors has improved. Although new classification strategies and definitions for pituitary tumors have been presented, there are still some controversies. The term pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNET) was proposed by the International Pituitary Pathology Club, and this terminology can encompass the unpredictable malignant behavior seen in the subset of aggressive pituitary adenomas (PAs). However, some endocrinologists who oppose this change in terminology have argued that the use of tumor in the terminology is misleading, as it gives PAs a harmful connotation when the majority are not aggressive. Such terminology may add new ambiguity to the origin of PAs and unnecessary anxiety and frustration for the majority of patients with benign PAs. The classification of aggressive PAs mainly relies on subjective judgment of clinical behavior and lacks objective biomarkers and unified diagnostic criteria. However, the term "refractory" could more accurately represent the characteristics of these tumors, including their clinical behaviors, radiological features, and pathologic characteristics. Moreover, the diagnostic criteria for refractory PAs are stricter, more objective, and more accurate than those for aggressive PAs. Early identification of patients with these tumors through recognition and increased awareness of the definition of refractory PAs will encourage the early use of aggressive therapeutic strategies.

Indexed as

AdenomaDiagnostic Techniques, EndocrineHumansNeuroendocrine TumorsPituitary NeoplasmsPractice Guidelines as TopicChina Pituitary Adenoma Specialist Councilclassificationdefinitionmanagementpituitary tumors

Identifiers

PMID33815274
PMCPMC8010908
OpenAlexW3138670979

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.