ArticleJournal of medical case reports2025
BRAF mutation in five cases of sinonasal ameloblastic tumors and their clinical course: a case report.
Article in Journal of medical case reports, 2025. 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.
- Malignant Odontogenic Tumors: A Clinicopathological Study of 53 Cases in Brazil.Head and neck pathology · 2026Article
- [Sinonasal ameloblastoma: Clinical case presentation and literature review].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSinonasal ameloblastic tumors exhibit unique clinical, pathological, and genetic traits distinct from mandibular bone cases, accounting for the majority of ameloblastic tumors. Recent findings emphasize a notable genetic disparity, showing high BRAF mutation rates in mandibular cases versus very low rates in maxillary cases. CASE PRESENTATION: We analyzed five sinonasal ameloblastic tumor cases treated at Kyushu University Hospital. All patients were Japanese, four male and one female, and their age ranged from 43 to 73 years. Three were diagnosed with ameloblastoma, with one experiencing recurrence that progressed to a life-threatening condition owing to the lack of effective treatment. One patient was histologically diagnosed as ameloblastic carcinoma, and another patient, although histologically diagnosed as ameloblastoma, presented with lymph node metastasis, confirming it as a metastasizing ameloblastoma with clinical malignancy. Local radical resection was performed in all five patients; however, three of them had positive resection margins, and two received postoperative (chemotherapy) radiation therapy. Recurrence was confirmed in two patients, with one patient undergoing chemoradiation therapy and achieving local control. BRAF mutations were detected in only one patient.
conclusionOwing to anatomical challenges in achieving negative resection margins and the low BRAF mutation frequency, sinonasal ameloblastic tumors exhibit poor prognosis with high recurrence, malignancy, and metastasis rates. When factors predicting recurrence post-radical resection in these tumors are identified, chemoradiation therapy is recommended as an adjuvant postoperative treatment. However, it should be noted that this presentation of adjuvant therapy is based on the experience of only five cases.
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.