ReviewJapanese journal of radiology2025
Rare pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma variants and other malignant epithelial tumors: a comprehensive clinical and radiologic review.
Review in Japanese journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography in differentiating pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Article
- Imaging of pancreatic hepatoid adenocarcinoma: a scoping review.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Review
- Pancreatic tumor detection in computed tomography images through a rotary positional siamese vision transformer.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A Preliminary Study on Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Characteristics of Solid Pseudopapillary Neoplasms and Pancreatoblastoma in Children.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Case of Pleomorphic-Type Anaplastic Carcinoma of the Pancreas with Rapidly Progressive and Fatal Cardiac Metastasis.Surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Excellent Survival Outcome in a Patient Receiving NALIRIFOX for Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Case Report.Oncology research · 2026Article
- Adult-Onset Pancreatoblastoma.ACG case reports journal · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over 95% of pancreatic carcinomas are classified as conventional pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (cPDAC), while less than 5% consist of rare histological subtypes. Some of these rare histological subtypes, such as colloid carcinoma, medullary carcinoma, and undifferentiated carcinoma with osteoclast-like giant cells, are associated with a relatively better prognosis compared to cPDAC, whereas others, including signet ring cell carcinoma/poorly cohesive carcinoma, adenosquamous carcinoma, large cell carcinoma with rhabdoid phenotype, and undifferentiated carcinoma, have a worse prognosis. Other malignant pancreatic epithelial tumors (MPET) include acinar cell carcinoma, pancreatoblastoma, and solid-pseudopapillary neoplasm that should also be differentiate from PDACs. Accurate differentiation among PDAC subtypes and other MPETs is essential for precise survival predictions and effective therapeutic planning. However, cPDAC, rare histological subtypes of PDAC and MPETs often exhibit similar imaging findings, making it challenging to establish a diagnosis based solely on imaging. Thus, needle biopsy or surgical resection is generally required for the final diagnosis. We herein present a review article based on case studies and literature reviews of rare histological subtypes of PDAC and other MPET, with particular focus on their imaging characteristics, referencing the 5th edition of the World Health Organization classification.
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.