ArticleJournal of neuropathology and experimental neurology2024
Clinicopathological differences between classical schwannomas and cellular schwannomas in the retroperitoneum.
Article in Journal of neuropathology and experimental neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- End-to-end deep learning model for the diagnosis and segmentation of primary retroperitoneal neoplasm: a multicenter cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Clinical Features and Ultrasonographic Manifestations of Retroperitoneal Nerve Sheath Tumors.Current medical imaging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare clinical and pathological features of retroperitoneal classical schwannomas and cellular schwannomas. A total of 64 cases of retroperitoneal classical schwannoma and 48 cases of cellular schwannoma were studied. Histopathological analysis was performed using hematoxylin and eosin staining and immunohistochemistry. Retroperitoneal cellular schwannomas exhibited 100% (48/48) and 75% (36/48) positive expression for glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and cytokeratins (CK), respectively. Classical schwannomas showed rates of 6.25% (4/64) and 15.63% (10/64), respectively (P < .05). In classic schwannomas, 85.9% (55/64) showed a reticular pattern of positive anti-CD34 staining around tumor margins and subcapsular areas vs 52.1% (25/48) in cellular schwannomas (P < .05). Cellular schwannomas exhibited more mitotic figures than classical schwannoma (P < .05). The recurrence rate of cellular schwannomas was 10.42% (5/48), while that of classical schwannomas was 1.56% (1/64) (P < .05). Retroperitoneal cellular schwannomas commonly express GFAP and CK compared to classical schwannomas, suggesting that cellular schwannoma may originate from unmyelinated Schwann cells, while classical schwannoma may originate from myelinated Schwann cells. Anti-CD34 staining patterns may be used to distinguish between the 2 types. Retroperitoneal cellular schwannomas also show higher mitotic activity and are more prone to recurrence.
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.