ArticleJournal of endocrinological investigation2026
The clinical challenge of MEN1 phenocopies: insights from a multicentric national retrospective study.
Article in Journal of endocrinological investigation, 2026. 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) is an autosomal dominant disorder caused by MEN1 gene mutations, typically involving primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT), pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs), and/or pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs). However, 10-30% of patients with MEN1-like features lack identifiable MEN1 mutations and are classified as phenocopies. This retrospective multicenter study, conducted across 10 Italian referral centers, aimed to characterize the main clinical features of phenocopies. Among 240 patients evaluated for suspected MEN1 over five years, 175 (mean age 43.2 ± 19.7; 101 females) had genetically confirmed MEN1, while 65 (27%; mean age 59.9 ± 11.6; 44 females) were identified as phenocopies. Of these, 46 (70.7%) were also negative for CDKN1B mutations, confirming the rarity of MEN4. Phenocopies were diagnosed one to two decades later than MEN1 patients (p < 0.0001). PHPT was the most frequent manifestation in both groups (80% of phenocopies vs. 81% of MEN1), but tumor associations differed significantly between groups (p < 0.001): 41% of MEN1 patients showed the classic triad, compared to only 1% of phenocopies; PHPT with NETs was more common in MEN1 (32%), whereas PHPT with PitNETs occurred more often in phenocopies (54%), reflecting patterns of sporadic tumors. Notably, 11% of phenocopies had a first-degree relative with MEN1-related diseases, and 51% had a personal or family history of cancer. In conclusion, MEN1 phenocopies are relatively common and represent a clinical challenge. Given their distinct features and familial backgrounds, an extended genetic panel should be offered to these patients together with periodical screening of MEN1-related disease.
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.