ArticleThe American journal of pathology1994
Differentiation between cutaneous form of adult T cell leukemia/lymphoma and cutaneous T cell lymphoma by in situ hybridization using a human T cell leukemia virus-1 DNA probe.
Article in The American journal of pathology, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adult T cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL) shares overlapping clinicopathological features with cutaneous T cell lymphoma (CTCL), requiring detection of monoclonal integration of proviral DNA of type 1 human T cell leukemia virus for its differential diagnosis from the latter. We applied in situ hybridization (ISH) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to paraffin sections from 63 Japanese autopsy cases that had been diagnosed as CTCL in earlier years when ATLL was still not widely known. Eleven and two cases with confirmed diagnoses of ATLL and CTCL served as positive and negative controls, respectively. It was found that ISH was positive in 7 of 63 test cases and 10 of 11 positive controls, whereas PCR was positive in none of the test cases and eight of the positive control cases. Two negative controls were negative for both ISH and PCR. We conclude that ISH is superior to PCR for detecting type 1 human T cell leukemia virus proviral DNA on paraffin sections and that the ISH method is useful for differentiating CTCL from the cutaneous form of ATLL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
8291605PMC1887115W1658569807What 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.