ReviewHistopathology2025
Malignant phyllodes tumours of the breast: the case for revising WHO's 'full house' diagnostic criteria.
Review in Histopathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- World Health Organization classification of tumours of the breast 6th edition 2026.Histopathology · 2026Review
- Molecular pathology of phyllodes tumours of the breast-much more than MED12.Histopathology · 2026Review
- The impact of different pathological diagnostic criteria on the prognosis of malignant phyllodes tumors of the breast.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Malignant phyllodes tumor of the breast with heterologous osteosarcomatous and pleomorphic liposarcomatous differentiation: a rare case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Contemporary management of phyllodes tumours of the breast: recommendations from the UK Association of Breast Surgery.The British journal of surgery · 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
42 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phyllodes tumours (PTs) of the breast present diagnostic challenges due to their complex histological features and potential for malignant behaviour. The World Health Organisation (WHO) classification requires the presence of five adverse histological criteria to categorise PTs as malignant, aiming to avoid overdiagnosis and improve diagnostic consistency. However, emerging evidence suggests that these strict criteria may underdiagnose tumours with metastatic potential and histological features that would otherwise be considered malignant in soft tissue tumours, leading to significant implications for prognosis and treatment. Recent studies have highlighted cases where tumours classified as borderline PT by WHO criteria exhibited metastatic behaviour, emphasising the need to refine the diagnostic framework. Microscopic criteria used to classify PT also vary among reporting pathologists, resulting in suboptimal reproducibility. This review examines the histological parameters utilised in the classification of malignant PT, highlights existing evidence gaps and analyses international breast pathologist survey data to propose a pragmatic diagnostic approach. We recommend redefining malignant PTs to include cases meeting four of the five WHO criteria, supplemented by comprehensive sampling and clinical context. This approach balances the risk of underdiagnosis with the need for standardised, reproducible diagnostic practices. Future collaborative efforts should focus upon developing evidence-based, biologically relevant classification systems and leveraging technological advancements to enhance diagnostic precision. These efforts aim to refine classification, improve prognostic accuracy and optimise patient management strategies.
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.