Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36230469›Full record

ReviewCancers2022

Update in Molecular Testing for Intraocular Lymphoma.

Michael J Heiferman, Michael D Yu, Prithvi Mruthyunjaya

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Primary Intraocular Lymphoma: Rad-Path and Ophthalmologic Correlation.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025
    Article
  3. Epidemiology, clinical features, and classification of 3,404 patients with uveitis: Colombian Uveitis Multicenter Study (COL-UVEA).Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024
    Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Michael J HeifermanDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Illinois Eye and Ear Infirmary, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3456-0164
Michael D YuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94303, USA.
Prithvi MruthyunjayaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94303, USA.

Funding

Stanford Vision Research CoreP30EY026877 · NEI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Jeffrey L Goldberg · 2017 to 2026
$8.0M
NEI NIH HHS P30-026877
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnosis of primary vitreoretinal lymphoma and central nervous system lymphoma is challenging. In cases with intraocular involvement, vitreous biopsy plays a pivotal role. Several diagnostic tests are employed to confirm a diagnosis and include cytologic evaluation, immunohistochemistry, flow cytometry, and cytokine analysis. The limitations of these conventional diagnostic tests stem from the often paucicellular nature of vitreous biopsy specimens and the fragility of malignant cells ex vivo. Several emerging molecular techniques show promise in improving the diagnostic yield of intraocular biopsy, possibly enabling more accurate and timely diagnoses. This article will review existing diagnostic modalities for intraocular lymphoma, with an emphasis on currently available molecular tests.

Indexed as

diagnostic vitrectomyintraocular lymphomamasqueradeocular pathologyvitreous biopsy

Identifiers

PMID36230469
PMCPMC9558525

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.