ArticleEndocrine oncology (Bristol, England)2025
Distinguishing neuroendocrine tumor grade 3 from neuroendocrine carcinoma in gastroenteropancreatic high-grade neoplasms.
Article in Endocrine oncology (Bristol, England), 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.
- Epigenetic Dysregulation of Somatostatin Receptors (SSTR) 1-5 and Therapeutic Implications in Neuroendocrine and Non-Neuroendocrine Malignancies.International journal of cancer · 2026Review
- Cytological Identification of a Rhabdoid Variant of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasm.Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: High-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) with a Ki-67 index >20% are currently classified as either grade 3 neuroendocrine tumors (NET G3) or neuroendocrine carcinomas (NEC). This study evaluates whether this subclassification is of diagnostic and prognostic significance. Design: We analyzed 98 high-grade NENs from 87 patients, categorized into NET G3 ( Methods: Histopathologic features, Ki-67 index, p53 and RB1 immunohistochemistry, growth patterns, necrosis, and somatostatin receptor type 2 (SSTR2) expression were assessed. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: NEC patients were older, had higher Ki-67 indices, and more often displayed solid growth, while NET G3 showed organoid architecture. Aberrant p53 and RB1 expression were significantly more common in NECs ( Conclusions: NET G3 and NEC show distinct clinicopathologic and prognostic profiles. Tumor origin offers additional stratification within NECs, while SSTR2 expression may inform targeted approaches. These findings underscore the need for nuanced classification and personalized management of high-grade NENs.
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.