ReviewOncology letters2025
Histomorphological and molecular characteristics of liposarcoma (Review).
Review in Oncology letters, 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.
- Well-Differentiated Liposarcoma of the Spermatic Cord Involving Testicular Parenchyma.Journal of medical cases · 2026Article
- Liposarcoma: State of the Art-A Scoping Review.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- [A case report of recurrent giant intermuscular lipoma in the temporal region].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2026Article
- Angiomatoid fibrous histiocytoma with CDK4 and MDM2 expression misdiagnosed as dedifferentiated liposarcoma: The first case report and literature review.SAGE open medical case reports · 2026Article
- Long-term survival with eribulin in an elderly patient with inoperable retroperitoneal well-differentiated liposarcoma: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
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
Liposarcomas represent the most prevalent subtype of soft-tissue sarcomas, comprising 15-20% of all documented cases. However, sarcomas demonstrate notable clinical and pathological variability, which complicates the processes of diagnosis and treatment. Histomorphological analysis can produce inconsistent results due to inter-examiner variability, which highlights the need for more reliable biomarkers. Genetic and epigenetic alterations may delineate the biological behavior of liposarcomas and assist in the prediction of liposarcoma prognosis. The present review highlights the related genomic alterations in sarcoma and their associations with relevant histomorphology, predilection, targeted therapy and prognosis. Well-differentiated and dedifferentiated liposarcomas exhibit amplified genes, MDM2 proto-oncogene and cyclin-dependent kinase 4, which are potential targets for therapy. Myxoid liposarcoma, characterized by the chromosomal translocations t(12;16) with fused in liposarcoma-DNA damage-inducible transcript 3 protein (DDIT3) fusion and t(12;22) with Ewing sarcoma RNA-binding protein 1-DDIT3 fusion, demonstrate a favorable response to treatment; however, myxoid liposarcoma displays elevated recurrence rates. Moreover, the complex karyotype and lack of specificity in pleomorphic liposarcoma are associated with poor treatment outcomes and increased recurrence rates. Integration of morphological features with molecular biomarkers may potentially enhance diagnosis, facilitate targeted therapies and improve sarcoma prognosis in the future.
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.