Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39182993›Full record

ReviewBrain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland)2025

Grading and staging for pituitary neuroendocrine tumors.

Chiara Villa, Maria Francesca Birtolo, Luis Gustavo Perez-Rivas, Alberto Righi, Guillaume Assie, Bertrand Baussart, Sofia Asioli

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Grading and staging for pituitary neuroendocrine tumors.Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Reply to letter by Melmed et al.Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Chiara VillaDepartment of Neuropathology, Hôpital Universitaire Pitié-Salpêtrière, APHP, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6245-4487
Maria Francesca BirtoloInserm U1016, CNRS UMR 8104, Institut Cochin, Université Paris Descartes-Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Luis Gustavo Perez-RivasMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik IV, LMU Klinikum, LMU München, Munich, Germany.
Alberto RighiDepartment of Pathology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Guillaume AssieInserm U1016, CNRS UMR 8104, Institut Cochin, Université Paris Descartes-Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Bertrand BaussartInserm U1016, CNRS UMR 8104, Institut Cochin, Université Paris Descartes-Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Sofia AsioliDepartment of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences (DIBINEM), Bellaria Hospital, AUSL Bologna, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pituitary adenoma/pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs) are the second most common primary intracranial tumor and the most frequent neuroendocrine tumors/neoplasms of the human body. Thus, they are one of the most frequent diagnoses in neuropathologist's practise. 2022 5th edition WHO Classification of Endocrine and Neuroendocrine Tumors does not support a grading and/or staging system for PitNETs and argues that histological typing and subtyping are more robust than proliferation rate and invasiveness to stratify tumors. Numerous studies suggest the existence of clinically relevant molecular subgroups encouraging an integrated histo-molecular approach to the diagnosis of PitNETs to deepen the understanding of their biology and overcome the unresolved problem of grading system. The present review illustrates the main issues involved in establishing a grading and a staging system, as well as alternative systems validated by independent series to date. The state of art of the current histological and molecular markers is detailed, demonstrating that a standardized and reproducible clinico-pathological approach, combined with the integration of molecular data may help build a workflow to refine the definition of PitNETs with 'malignant potential' and most importantly, avoid delay in patient treatment. Next molecular studied are needed to validate an integrated histo-molecular grading for PitNETs.

Indexed as

Neoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingNeuroendocrine TumorsPituitary NeoplasmsAdenomaHumansEPPGgradingPitNETspituitary adenomastagingWHO classification

Identifiers

PMID39182993
PMCPMC11669418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.