ReviewJournal of cutaneous pathology2025
Ancillary Tools for the Diagnosis of CIC -Rearranged Sarcoma: A Comprehensive Review.
Review in Journal of cutaneous pathology, 2025. 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.
- CIC-rearranged sarcoma of the arm presenting as a soft tissue mass with regional lymphadenopathy and tumor thrombus.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
- Clinicopathological features of CIC-rearranged sarcomas: a retrospective study including novel visceral locations and methylation profile analysis.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Gene fusion-driven cutaneous mesenchymal neoplasms: An updated review emphasizing the emerging entities.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
CIC-rearranged sarcoma is a rare and aggressive undifferentiated round cell sarcoma that presents significant diagnostic challenges due to its histologic overlap with other round cell sarcomas. This review, conducted on behalf of the American Society of Dermatopathology Appropriate Use Criteria Committee (soft tissue subgroup), provides an overview of current immunohistochemical, cytogenetic, and molecular tests used to support the diagnosis of CIC-rearranged sarcoma. This comprehensive analysis included 36 studies, encompassing 436 CIC-rearranged sarcomas. The immunohistochemical markers, CD99 (typically non-diffuse), nuclear WT1, ETV4, and DUX4, were found to be relatively highly sensitive for CIC-rearranged sarcoma (CD99: 87%, WT1: 83%, ETV4: 85%, DUX4: 97%). However, the specificity of these markers is variable, with CD99 being highly non-specific, while WT1 (81%-90%), ETV4 (95%), and DUX4 (100%) offering greater specificity. CIC break-apart FISH can be a helpful and cost-effective assay for detection of CIC-rearrangements, but has a false-negative rate that ranges from 26% to 43%. Next-generation sequence RNA fusion analysis also carries a risk of false negatives, which may be partly mitigated through manual data review. Ultimately, an accurate diagnosis of CIC-rearranged sarcoma requires careful morphologic assessment in combination with immunohistochemical studies and cytogenetics/molecular assays.
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.