ArticleOncology letters2025
Misdiagnosis of chordoma: A case report and a review of the literature.
Article in Oncology letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate the clinicopathological features and diagnostic criteria for differentiating between chordoma and chordoid meningioma. A case of chordoma was retrospectively analyzed using clinical, radiographic, histological and immunohistochemical data, alongside a literature review. A 59-year-old male patient was admitted with headaches and dizziness persisting for 2 months without any obvious precipitating factors. The patient underwent two intracranial tumor resections between March 2022 and December 2023. The pathology report from the first surgery indicated that the tumor was composed of cords of epithelioid cells with vacuolated cytoplasm embedded in a basophilic stroma. Immunohistochemical analysis showed positivity for cytokeratin, vimentin, epithelial membrane antigen, synaptophysin, cytokeratin 8/18 and E-cadherin, with a Ki-67 proliferation index of 3%. Progesterone receptor, D2-40, glial fibrillary acidic protein, S100 and SOX10 staining were negative. Based on the pathology and immunohistochemical findings, the diagnosis was determined to be a chordoma-like meningioma (World Health Organization Grade 2). The pathology report from the second surgery revealed a tumor composed of cords and isolated epithelioid cells with intracytoplasmic vacuoles within a myxoid matrix. However, immunohistochemical analysis indicated positivity for Brachyury, leading to a diagnosis of chordoma. In conclusion, the histological morphology of chordoma is similar to that of chordoid meningioma and lacks clinical specificity. Immunohistochemical staining of tumor markers assists in both the diagnosis and differential diagnosis. Currently, treatment for chordoma and choroid mengioma primarily focuses on surgical resection, which is associated with high rates of relapse. The differential diagnosis predominantly influences the postoperative treatment strategy.
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.