ArticleGenes, chromosomes & cancer2024
Complementary value of molecular analysis to expert review in refining classification of uncommon soft tissue tumors.
Article in Genes, chromosomes & cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Next-Generation Sequencing Refines Diagnosis and Expands Precision Medicine Opportunities in Soft Tissue Sarcomas.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Transcriptomic Subgroups in Soft Tissue Tumors Correlate with Morphologic Subtype, Genomic Features, and Outcome.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026Article
- Article
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 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The classification of many soft tissue tumors remains subjective due their rarity, significant overlap in microscopic features and often a non-specific immunohistochemical (IHC) profile. The application of molecular genetic tools, which leverage the underlying molecular pathogenesis of these neoplasms, have considerably improved the diagnostic abilities of pathologists and refined classification based on objective molecular markers. In this study, we describe the results of an international collaboration conducted over a 3-year period, assessing the added diagnostic value of applying molecular genetics to sarcoma expert pathologic review in a selected series of 84 uncommon, mostly unclassifiable mesenchymal tumors, 74 of which originated in soft tissues and 10 in bone. The case mix (71% historical, 29% contemporary) included mostly unusual and challenging soft tissue tumors, which remained unclassified even with the benefit of expert review and routine ancillary methods, including broad IHC panels and a limited number of commercially available fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) probes. All cases were further tested by FISH using a wide range of custom bacterial artificial chromosome probes covering most of known fusions in sarcomas, whereas targeted RNA sequencing was performed in 13 cases negative by FISH, for potential discovery of novel fusion genes. Tumor-defining molecular alterations were found in 48/84 tumors (57%). In 27 (32%) cases the tumor diagnosis was refined or revised by the additional molecular work-up, including five cases (6%), in which the updated diagnosis had clinical implications. Sarcoma classification is rapidly evolving due to an increased molecular characterization of these neoplasms, so unsurprisingly 17% of the tumors in this series harbored abnormalities only very recently described as defining novel molecularly defined soft tissue tumor subsets.
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.