ArticleJournal of translational medicine2024
Comparison of standard mismatch repair deficiency and microsatellite instability tests in a large cancer series.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Lynch Syndrome as a Spectrum of Four Distinct Genetic Disorders: Toward Genotype-Guided Precision Management in the NGS Era.Cancers · 2026Review
- Comparison of gene mutations of liver metastases to the primary tumor in colorectal cancer: lessons from a small cohort.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Mismatch Repair as a Dynamic and Clinically Actionable Vulnerability in Cancer.Cancer research · 2025Review
- Article
- Response to PD-1 inhibition in MMRd/MSS pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: the relevance of parallel testing.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- MLH1 and MSH2 expression in endometrial cancer - microscopic and computer assessment of immunohistochemical method.Histology and histopathology · 2025Article
- Detecting microsatellite instability in cancerChemical science · 2025Article
- A novel algorithm for the detection of microsatellite instability in endometrial cancer using next‑generation sequencing data.Oncology letters · 2025Article
- Overview of a comparative analysis of microsatellite instability and standard mismatch repair protein-deficiency tests in a large cancer cohort.Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Microsatellite instability and mismatch repair protein deficiency: equal predictive markers?Pathology oncology research : POR · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe tumor-agnostic indication of immune checkpoint inhibitors to treat cancers with mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR)/microsatellite instability (MSI) increased the demand for such tests beyond Lynch syndrome. International guideline recommendations accept immunohistochemistry (IHC) for dMMR or molecular techniques (PCR or NGS) for MSI status determinations considering the two tests are equal, although there are scattered reports contradicting to this presumption. MATERIALS AND
methodsHere we have directly compared four protein MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC) to MSI Pentaplex PCR test in a large cancer patient cohort (n = 1306) of our diagnostic center where the two tests have been run parallel in 703 cases.
resultsIn this study we have found a high discrepancy rate (19.3%) of the two tests which was independent of the tumor types. The MSI PCR sensitivity for MMR IHC status was found to be very low resulting in a relatively low positive and negative predicting values. As a consequence, the correlation of the two tests was low (kappa < 0.7). During analysis of the possible contributing factors of this poor performance, we have excluded low tumor percentage of the samples, but identified dMMR phenotypes (classic versus non-classic or unusual) as possible contributors.
conclusionAlthough our cohort did not include samples with identified technical errors, our data strongly support previous reports that unidentified preanalytical factors might have the major influence on the poor performance of the MSI PCR and MMR IHC. Furthermore, the case is open whether the two test types are equally powerful predictive markers of immunotherapies.
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.