Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35992051›Full record

ArticleAnalytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam)2022

Diagnostic and Prognostic Impact of Progesterone Receptor Immunohistochemistry: A Study Evaluating More Than 16,000 Tumors.

Florian Viehweger, Lisa-Marie Tinger, David Dum, Natalia Gorbokon, Anne Menz, Ria Uhlig, Franziska Büscheck, Andreas M Luebke, Claudia Hube-Magg, Andrea Hinsch and 16 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

26 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Florian ViehwegerInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Lisa-Marie TingerInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
David DumInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Natalia GorbokonInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Anne MenzInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4364-6464
Ria UhligInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4880-6519
Franziska BüscheckInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Andreas M LuebkeInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1464-6964
Claudia Hube-MaggInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-4340
Andrea HinschInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5868-1185
Doris HöflmayerInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8032-2920
Christoph FrauneInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0833-9549
Patrick LebokInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3652-532X
Sören WeidemannInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Maximilian LennartzInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1572-8200
Frank JacobsenInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Till S ClauditzInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4257-856X
Rainer KrechInstitute of Pathology, Clinical Center Osnabrueck, Osnabrueck, Germany.
Till KrechInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Andreas H MarxInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Ronald SimonInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0158-4258
Eike BurandtInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5705-9084
Stefan SteurerInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3313-0453
Guido SauterInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9024-4978
Sarah MinnerInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0765-3568
Christian BernreutherInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3939-322X
Universität Hamburg · DEOsnabrück University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Progesterone receptor (PR) is a member of the nuclear/steroid hormone receptor family of ligand-dependent transcription factors. It plays an important role in reproduction and mammary gland development and has various tissue-specific effects in nonreproductive organs. In diagnostic pathology, positive PR immunostaining is used to support a diagnosis of breast or gynecologic origin in a tumor. In this study, the expression of PR was analyzed by immunohistochemistry in 18,176 (interpretable: 16,445) samples from 147 different tumor types and subtypes in a tissue microarray format. PR immunostaining was detected in 57.4% of breast tumors, 28.6% of other gynecological tumors, and 1.8% of nongynecological and nonmammary tumors. Among the group of nongynecological and nonmammary tumors, particularly high rates of PR positivity were seen in neuroendocrine tumors (54.3%) and neuroendocrine carcinomas (35.7%) of the pancreas. A comparison with clinico-pathological parameters showed that reduced PR immunostaining was significantly associated with adverse histopathological and clinical features in breast carcinoma, endometrioid endometrial carcinoma, and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. In summary, our analysis of 147 different tumor types for PR immunostaining provides a ranking list of tumor entities according to their prevalence of PR positivity, helps to better understand the diagnostic utility of PR, and highlights the distinct PR positivity among neuroendocrine neoplasms of pancreatic origin.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsReceptors, ProgesteroneFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryPrognosisReceptors, Progesterone

Identifiers

PMID35992051
PMCPMC9381849
OpenAlexW4290673507

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.