ArticleCancer medicine2026
Molecular Characterization and Its Clinical Application of GNAS Variants in Intramuscular Myxoma.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntramuscular myxoma (IM) is a benign tumor that harbors GNAS missense variants. Distinguishing IM from low-grade myxofibrosarcoma (LGMFS) is challenging due to similarities in imaging and histological features. While molecular analysis aids differentiation, the low number of tumor cells available for DNA extraction necessitates highly accurate detection methods for variant identification. The aim of this study was to delineate molecular characteristics using next-generation sequencing (NGS) and to propose an optimal screening method in a clinical setting to differentiate IM from LGMFS. MATERIALS: Ten IM cases and nine LGMFS cases with extractable DNA from FFPE samples were recruited.
resultsA custom NGS panel-based analysis for GNAS revealed R201C/R201H variants in resected samples of eight cases with IM and in none of the eight cases, excluding one with insufficient sample quality, with LGMFS, and in biopsy samples of both available cases with IM. Additionally, various sequence alterations were detected irrespective of the clinical status (IM, LGMFS, and normal tissue) or sample conditions (resected, biopsy, and relapsed). The detection rate of GNAS-positive IM using other methods (PCR-direct sequencing, fragment signal analysis using restriction digestion and capillary electrophoresis after PCR combined with peptide nucleic acid (PNA) clamping, and PCR-direct sequencing combined with PNA clamping) was calculated as 0.42, 0.83, and 0.75, respectively, while the detection rate for GNAS-negative LGMFS was 1.
conclusionThese findings suggest that fragment signal analysis is a reasonable diagnostic approach for differentiating IM from LGMFS. However, it is important to recognize that the absence of GNAS R201C/R201H variants does not rule out IM.
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.