Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34374212›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2021

Refined pancreatobiliary UroVysion criteria and an approach for further optimization.

Daniel Mettman, Azhar Saeed, Janna Shold, Raquele Laury, Andrew Ly, Irfan Khan, Shivani Golem, Mojtaba Olyaee, Maura O'Neil

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel MettmanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1735-8925
Azhar SaeedDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Janna SholdDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Raquele LauryDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Andrew LyDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Irfan KhanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Shivani GolemDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Mojtaba OlyaeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Maura O'NeilDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
University of Kansas Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pancreatobiliary strictures are a common source of false negatives for malignancy detection. UroVysion is more sensitive than any other method but remains underutilized because of conflicting sensitivities and specificities due to a lack of standardized cutoff criteria and confusion in interpreting results in the context of primary sclerosing cholangitis. We set out to determine the sensitivities and specificities of UroVysion, brushing cytology, forceps biopsies, and fine needle aspiration (FNAs) for pancreatobiliary stricture malignancy detection. A retrospective review was performed of all biopsied pancreatobiliary strictures at our institution over 5 years. UroVysion was unquestionably the most sensitive method and all methods were highly specific. Sensitivity was highest while maintaining specificity when a malignant interpretation was limited to cases with 5+ cells with the same polysomic signal pattern and/or loss of one or both 9p21 signals. Only UroVysion detected the metastases and a neuroendocrine tumor. In reviewing and analyzing the signal patterns, we noticed trends according to location and diagnosis. Herein we describe our method for analyzing signal patterns and propose cutoff criteria based upon observations gleaned from such analysis.

Indexed as

Bile Duct NeoplasmsCytogeneticsFemaleHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMalePancreatic NeoplasmscytogeneticscytopathologyFISHpancreatobiliarystricture

Identifiers

PMID34374212
PMCPMC8419786
OpenAlexW3187952069

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.