ReviewVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2026
MiNEN, amphicrine carcinomas, and conventional carcinomas with neuroendocrine differentiation: diagnostic criteria, open questions, and future perspectives.
Review in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- What are the Unmet Needs in Managing Digestive Neuroendocrine Carcinomas?Current oncology reports · 2026Review
- Divergent c-MYC Expression Patterns in NET and NEC: Insights from a Multicentre Cohort of 1380 Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.Endocrine pathology · 2026Article
- Gastrointestinal conventional carcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation: From pathological phenomenon to clinical importance (Review).Oncology letters · 2026Review
- Origin and evolution of colorectal mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNEN).Endocrine-related cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- Mixed Neuroendocrine-Non-Neuroendocrine Neoplasm of the Esophagogastric Junction with Enteroblastic Differentiation and Morphologic-Immunophenotypic Discordance: A Case Report with Five-Year Disease-Free Survival.Surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Rethinking the prognostic and biological significance of neuroendocrine marker expression in colorectal carcinoma.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mixed neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNEN) represent a heterogeneous group of bidirectionally differentiated epithelial malignancies that are, in most cases, highly aggressive. They are defined by the presence of morphologically distinct, yet clonally related, neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine components, each comprising at least 30% of the tumor mass according to current guidelines. Tumors that fall within the differential diagnostic spectrum of MiNEN include amphicrine carcinomas-characterized by the co-expression of neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine features within the same tumor cell-as well as conventional carcinomas that lack neuroendocrine morphology but exhibit immunohistochemical expression of neuroendocrine markers. However, these entities do not fulfill the current diagnostic criteria for MiNEN. In this review, we aim to outline the current diagnostic framework for MiNEN and examine the conceptual and classification boundaries of amphicrine carcinomas and conventional carcinomas with aberrant neuroendocrine marker expression in relation to what is presently defined as a MiNEN. In addition, we highlight key unresolved questions that should be addressed in future guidelines to streamline the diagnostic process and improve consistency. Finally, we provide an outlook on emerging technologies and future perspectives that may further refine the classification and clinical management of these complex neoplasms.
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.