ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2024
PIT-EASY survey: validation of the European Pituitary Pathology Group proposal for reporting pituitary neuroendocrine tumors.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 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.
- The Changing Treatment Paradigm for Prolactinoma-A Prospective Series of 100 Consecutive Neurosurgical Cases.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025Article
- Navigating prognostic strategies for GH- and PRL-secreting pituitary neuroendocrine tumors: key insights from a clinicopathological study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Grading and staging for pituitary neuroendocrine tumors.Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this multicenter prospective survey called PIT-EASY was to assess the relevance of the European Pituitary Pathology Group (EPPG) diagnostic tools for pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs) to improve the quality of their histological diagnosis. Each center performed at least 30 histological cases of PitNETs using the EPPG tools and assessed their value using a scorecard with 10 questions. For each center, the histological cases were carried out by pathologists with varying levels of expertise in pituitary pathology defined as junior, intermediate, and expert. Two hundred and ninety histological cases were collected from six French and Italian centers. The three EPPG tools were validated and regarded as helpful for a more accurate and time-efficient diagnosis. The usefulness of level 2 and level 3 of the "EPPG's multi-step approach for immunohistochemistry" including pituitary transcription factors (PIT1, TPIT, and SF1) and chromogranin, SSTRs, and P53 respectively was higher in "other non-functioning" (silent plurihormonal PIT1, silent corticotroph, and null cell): 88% vs 32%, p < 10-6 and 42% vs 14%, p = 0.002, respectively. The diagnostic algorithm proved more useful for junior pathologists (p = 0.0001) and those with intermediate experience. PIT-EASY survey confirmed the importance of a standardized approach to PitNETs for an accurate and reproducible diagnosis and served as validation of the EPPG proposal. The tool appeared to be of practical value to junior participants and staff with intermediate experience for safe routine diagnostic reporting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38907774What 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.