ArticleThoracic cancer2022
Comprehensive genetic analysis of histological components of combined small cell carcinoma.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pathological and molecular characterization of a four-component combined small cell lung carcinoma: a case report.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Spatial multi-omics unveils the monoclonal origin, neuroendocrine plasticity, and microenvironment niches in combined small-cell lung cancer.Cell reports. Medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning-driven prognostic prediction model for composite small cell lung cancer: identifying risk factors with network tools and validation using SEER data and external cohorts.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Combined small cell lung cancer: current progress and unmet needs.American journal of cancer research · 2023Review
- Comprehensive genetic analysis of histological components of combined small cell carcinoma.Thoracic cancer · 2022Article
- Targeting the EGFR signaling pathway in cancer therapy: What's new in 2023?Expert opinion on therapeutic targetsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCombined small-cell lung cancer (cSCLC) is a rare type of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) that includes both SCLC and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The molecular biological mechanisms underlying the heterogeneity of histological types in combined or metachronously transformed SCLC (mtSCLC) remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between genetic alterations and each histological component heterogeneously detected in cSCLC and mtSCLC.
methodsThis study included four cSCLC cases and one mtSCLC case. Formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded sections of each histological component of these tumors were subjected to next-generation sequencing (NGS) and quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction to investigate the genetic mutations and expression levels of neuroendocrine cell-specific transcription factors (achaete-scute homolog-1 [ASCL1], brain-2 [BRN2] also known as POU domain class 3 transcription factor 2, nuclear factor 1 B [NF1B], insulinoma-associated protein 1 [INSM1], and thyroid transcription factor-1 [TTF-1]).
resultsNGS analysis revealed that SCLC and NSCLC components share the same somatic mutations detected most frequently in TP53, and also in RB1 and EGFR. Gene expression analysis showed ASCL1 expression was significantly lower in the NSCLC component than in the SCLC component.
conclusionWe conclude that the morphological evolution of heterogeneous histological components in cSCLC may be associated with differences in ASCL1 expression levels, but not in acquired somatic gene mutations.
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.