ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2024
Comparison of risk of malignancy and predictive value of diagnostic categories defined by Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology system and WHO reporting system for pancreaticobiliary cytopathology in solid pancreatic lesions.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 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.
- A machine learning-based interpretable model for predicting pancreatic cancer in chronic pancreatitis patients with focal pancreatic lesions.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- EUSEndoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The standardized diagnostic categories defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) reporting system support the interdisciplinary interpretation of cytological findings in the management of pancreatic cancer. Objective: To compare this classification to the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology (PSC) system in terms of predictive value and risk of malignancy (ROM) in solid pancreatic lesions. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Methods: All consecutive patients with solid pancreatic lesions who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) sampling at the University of Szeged from 2014 to 2021 were retrospectively enrolled. The predictive value and ROM of cytological findings were determined with comparison to histologic outcome and/or clinical follow-up. Results: A total of 521 EUS-FNAs were performed with a malignancy rate of 81.76%. In both classification systems, the absolute ROM of "non-diagnostic," "negative for malignancy," "atypical," "suspicious for malignancy," and "malignant" categories were 48.2%, 2.3%, 78.1%, 100.0%, and 99.4%, respectively. Despite the heterogeneous nature of the "neoplastic: other" category of the PSC system, the absolute ROM for solid lesions was 100%. Pancreatic neoplasm: high-risk/grade category including only two endosonographically solid cases of high-grade intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms showed 100% ROM. There were no differences between PSC and WHO systems in sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values: excluding the "atypical" category, these were 99.7%, 95.6%, 97.7%, and 99.5%, respectively. The "atypical" category considered benign resulted in a higher decrease in validity and negative predictive value, compared to "atypical" considered true malignant (93.6% vs 97.7% and 65.8% vs 97.7%). Conclusion: For solid pancreatic lesions, the WHO system was identical to the PSC system in terms of ROM and predictive values.
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.