ArticleNorthern clinics of Istanbul2024
Evaluation of MMP-9, MMP-13, MMP-21, and TIMP-1 expressions in malign melanom, dysplastic nevi, and banal nevi.
Article in Northern clinics of Istanbul, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAlthough the role of MMPs in the pathogenesis of melanoma is known, few studies have investigated their role in the development of nevi and dysplastic nevi. This study aims to search the expression differences of MMP-9, MMP-13, MMP-21, and TIMP-1 between malignant melanoma (MM), intradermal nevi (IDN), and dysplastic nevi (DN).
methodsMMP-9, MMP-13, MMP-21, and TIMP-1 antibodies were studied immunohistochemically for 60 cases in our pathology clinic archive between 2013 and 2014.
resultsThe MM group had the highest expression percentage and intensity for MMP-9 (p<0.001). There was no statistical significance between MMP-13 expression intensities of lesion cells and stromal cells and stromal expression intensities (p>0.05). MMP-21 lesion staining intensities in DN and MM compared to IDN were statistically significant (p=0.001, p=0.011, respectively). For TIMP-1, there was a significant difference between the IDN and the MM group regarding the staining proportion of lesion cells (p<0.01). There was a statistically significant difference in all groups according to lesion cells' expression intensity. (IDN-DN p<0.001, IDN-MM p=0.044, DN-MM p<0.001).
conclusionThe following markers can be helpful when lesions cannot be differentiated; increased staining proportions and intensity of MMP-9 in both lesion and stromal cells favor MM in cases where MM and IDN cannot be differentiated. The increased MMP-13 staining proportion of lesion cells can favor DN in cases where the pathologist cannot differentiate DN and MM. Intense expression of MMP-21 by lesion cells can be a potential marker for evaluating the lesion in favor of DN in cases where DN and IDN cannot be differentiated. The high expression intensity of TIMP-1 in lesion cells can favor DN in cases where there is ambiguity between DN and MM. High expression proportion and intensity of stromal cells of TIMP-1 can be useable in favor of MM in cases where MM and DN cannot be differentiated.
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.