ReviewFunctional & integrative genomics2022
Retroperitoneal liposarcoma and craniosynostosis: possible genomic relationship, case report, and literature review.
Review in Functional & integrative genomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global trends in retroperitoneal sarcomas surgery: a bibliometric analysis from 2005 to 2024.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Thoracoscopic resection of primary mediastinal liposarcoma: a case report and literature review.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Based on a case report, this review explores the genomic landscape for patients with liposarcomas and possible relationships with gene mutations related to craniosynostosis. We describe the case of a 40-year-old man, known for a surgical correction of craniosynostosis before the age of 1 year, who underwent a radical resection of a voluminous retroperitoneal liposarcoma; histopathological analysis revealed a low-grade well-differentiated, mostly sclerosing, liposarcoma. A genetic analysis searching for mutations in blood DNA was performed and did not detect any specific mutation. A literature review was also conducted. Several tumors related to syndromic and non-syndromic craniosynostosis are mentioned in the literature; no specific link with retroperitoneal liposarcoma is established but the FGFR3 mutation is detected in dedifferentiated liposarcomas. To date, no case has been reported in the literature demonstrating a genetic relationship between craniosynostosis and low-grade differentiated retroperitoneal liposarcoma. We conclude that further studies for gene complex mutations should be conducted to show a possible genetic relationship between retroperitoneal liposarcoma and craniosynostosis.
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.