ReviewRadiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2023
[Cancer of unknown primary-The new ESMO guidelines].
Review in Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) recently published extensively revised guidelines on cancer of unknown primary (CUP). The new version contains the following relevant amendments: with respect to diagnostics of CUP, the current guidelines aim for a more precise and standardized definition of CUP by establishing diagnostic algorithms. Recommendations for molecular diagnostics of cancer tissue have also been implemented. With respect to CUP classification, the favorable category has been revised. A carcinoma with immunohistochemistry typical for renal cell carcinoma (renal-like CUP) was introduced in the new definition of favorable subtypes, for which a specific treatment is indicated. Based on a newly defined oligometastatic situation a subgroup with localized cancer potentially curatively treatable with surgery and/or radiotherapy was introduced into the CUP classification. With respect to treatment of CUP, the current guidelines present options beyond empirical chemotherapy, which is still the standard of care treatment, and pinpoint indications and predictive biomarkers for targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. RELEVANT UPDATES: The European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) recently published extensively revised guidelines on the CUP syndrome. The new version contains the following relevant amendments: the current guidelines aim for a more precise and standardized definition of CUP by establishing diagnostic algorithms with respect to the diagnostics of CUP syndrome. Recommendations for molecular diagnostics of cancer tissue have also been implemented. The classification of the CUP syndrome has also been revised. A carcinoma with immunohistochemistry typical for renal cell carcinoma (renal-like CUP) was introduced in the new definition of favorable subtypes, for which a specific treatment is indicated. Based on a newly defined oligometastatic situation a local potentially curatively treatable with surgery and/or radiotherapy subgroup was introduced into the CUP classification. With respect to treatment of the CUP syndrome, the current guidelines present options beyond empirical chemotherapy, which is still the gold standard treatment, and pinpoint indications and predictive biomarkers for targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. SCHLUSSFOLGERUNG: The aim of this review is to present the current state of diagnostics, classification and treatment of CUP syndrome, with a focus on recent developments and revisions implemented in the current ESMO guidelines.
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.