ArticleDiagnostic pathology2024
Clinicopathological characteristics and genetic features of young and senior Ewing sarcoma patients.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEwing sarcoma (EwS) is a highly malignant and heterogeneous tumor. Exploring clinicopathological characteristics and genetic features of EwS is critical for prognosis and treatment regimen.
methodsClinicopathological characteristics and genetic features of young (≤ 30y) and senior (> 30y) EwS patients were analyzed based on histology, phenotype, and next-generation sequencing (NGS) detection.
resultsThe young group (18/36) presented nontypical EwS histological morphology, whereas the senior group (18/36) presented typical morphology. The prognosis of the young group was found to be worse compared with the senior group for patients without metastasis at the initial diagnosis. DNA- and RNA-based NGS was conducted on 20 extraosseous EwS patients. 16/20 samples demonstrated EWSR1-FLI1 fusion and 4/20 demonstrated EWSR1-ERG fusion. However, 13/16 EWSR1-FLI1fusions were detected both in DNA- and RNA-based NGS, 1/16 was detected only at the DNA level, and 2/16 were detected only at the RNA level. An analysis of the genetic profiles of the EWSR1-FLI1 cases revealed that the young group was inclined to couple with more copy number variations (CNV), such as CCND1, CDK4 amplification, and fusion variations, such as CHEK1-EWSR1, SLIT2-EWSR1, and EWSR1-FAM76B fusion. The senior group was more likely to have SNV or Indel mutations, such as EPHA3 and STAG2 mutations. Moreover, patients with more CNV abnormalities had a worse prognosis than those with predominantly SNP variants. In addition, compared with the senior group, the young group had significantly higher CyclinD1 protein expression.
conclusionClinicopathological characteristics and genetic features in young and senior EwS patients differed significantly. Targeting cell cycle dysregulation based on age subgroup may be a potential therapeutic strategy for Ewing sarcoma.
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.