ReviewChinese clinical oncology2022
Critical issues in pathologic evaluation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma resected after neoadjuvant treatment: a narrative review.
Review in Chinese clinical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Prognostic significance of three lymph node staging systems in pancreatic cancer with ≤ 12 and > 12 retrieved lymph nodes.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Lymphatic metastasis in pancreatic cancer: from bedside to bench and back.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2025Review
- Clinical Applications of Quantitative Imaging and Artificial Intelligence for Pancreatic Cance.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2025Review
- Plasma-derived exosomal long noncoding RNAs of pancreatic cancer patients as novel blood-based biomarkers of disease.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- [Histopathologic diagnosis of solid and cystic pancreatic lesions with a focus on ductal adenocarcinoma : A vademecum for daily practice].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Article
- Registration-based biomarkers for neoadjuvant treatment response of pancreatic cancer via longitudinal image registration.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2023Article
- Multi-level integrative analysis of the roles of lncRNAs and differential mRNAs in the progression of chronic pancreatitis to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.BMC genomics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivePreoperative neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is increasingly used in the treatment of patients with potentially resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Because NAT often induces heterogeneous tumor response and extensive fibrosis both in tumor and adjacent pancreatic tissue, pathologic assessment of posttherapy pancreatectomy specimens is challenging. A limited number of studies examined the optimal grossing and sampling methods, tumor response grading (TRG), and the prognostic value of posttherapy tumor (ypT) and lymph node (ypN) stages of treated PDAC patients. In this review, we will provide an overview of the current status and critical issues in pathologic evaluation of PDAC resected after NAT.
methodsIn PubMed, Google Scholar and Web of Science, we reviewed existing English literature (published up to December 2021) highlighting the most recent ones using electronic databases and authors' experience to outline the challenging aspects and new perspectives on pathologic assessment of the treated PDAC. KEY CONTENT AND
findingsThe recent recommendations from the Pancreatobiliary Pathology Society (PBPS) provide the much-needed guidelines for systematic and standardized pathologic evaluation and reporting of treated PDAC for optimal patient care. For treated PDAC, tumor size measured by gross and radiology is not reliable. Histologic validation of tumor size on consecutive mapping sections is recommended for accurate ypT stage. A tumor size of 1.0 cm seems to be a better cutoff for ypT2 for treated PDACs. The published data suggested that the MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDA) TRG system is easy to use, has a better interobserver agreement and better correlation with patient prognosis compared to the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and Evans grading systems and may be used as an alternative TRG system for the CAP cancer protocol.
conclusionsSystemic and standardized grossing and sampling are essential for accurate pathologic evaluation and reporting for optimal care of PDAC patients who received NAT. Future studies on optimal sampling and integration of histopathology with artificial intelligence (AI), molecular and immunohistochemical markers are needed for better and personalized care of treated PDAC patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.