Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36685704›Full record

ArticleBrain & spine2023

Meningioma classification by immunohistochemistry: A replicability study.

Olivia Näslund, Anna Lipatnikova, Anna Dénes, Cecilia Lindskog, Thomas Olsson Bontell, Anja Smits, Asgeir S Jakola, Alba Corell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain & spine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Olivia NäslundDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology at the Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Anna LipatnikovaDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology at the Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Anna DénesDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology at the Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Cecilia LindskogDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Thomas Olsson BontellDepartment of Clinical Pathology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Anja SmitsDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology at the Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Asgeir S JakolaDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology at the Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Alba CorellDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology at the Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Meningiomas account for nearly 40% of intracranial tumors. Recently, the immunohistochemistry (IHC) markers S100B, SCGN, ACADL and MCM2 have been shown to be associated with underlying biological subtypes of meningioma (MG1-MG4). We aimed to evaluate these IHC markers in a clinical setting. Research question: Are the new proposed IHC markers clinically useful? Methods: In total, 244 patients with meningiomas with tissue in TMAs were included and the IHC markers S100B, SCGN, ACADL and MCM2 were analyzed. Two sets of analyses were performed; the first included all samples with any staining considered positive, the second only samples with >10% immunopositivity. PFS and OS were analyzed in correlation to immunopositivity in the second analysis set. Results: In the first set of analyses only 26.2% of samples could be to allocate to one group. No further analyses were performed with this selection. In the second set of analyses 52.0% could be allocated to a group. There was an enrichment of WHO grade 2 and 3 tumors in MG3 and MG4 as compared to MG1 (24.1% and 25.7% vs. 12.1%). Both the molecular group (p ​= ​0.032) and WHO grade (p ​= ​0.005) had significant impact on PFS, but only WHO grade predicted OS (p ​= ​0.033). Conclusion: We studied the proposed new method of classifying meningiomas into groups MG1, MG2, MG3 and MG4 using IHC markers, but found difficulties applying the classification system in our material mainly due to lack of exclusivity of markers. Thus, in its present form the classification method lacks clinical applicability.

Indexed as

ImmunohistochemistryMeningiomaMolecular markerRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID36685704
PMCPMC9845417

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.