Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 337

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Prognostic relevance of morphological types of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas

Open access
Furukawa, Toru, Hatori, Takashi, Fujita, Izumi, Yamamoto, Masakazu, Kobayashi, Makio, Ohike, Nobuyuki, Morohoshi, Toshio, Egawa, Shinichi, Unno, Michiaki, Takao, Sonshin, Osako, Masahiko, Yonezawa, Suguru, Mino-Kenudson, Mari, Lauwers, Gregory Y, Yamaguchi, Hiroshi, Ban, Shinichi, Shimizu, Michio·2011·Gut

Abstract

Objective: The clinicopathological significance of four morphological types of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas (IPMNs; gastric, intestinal, pancreatobiliary and oncocytic) was assessed. Design: Retrospective multicentre analysis of 283 surgically resected IPMNs. Results: Of the 283 IPMNs, 139 were of the gastric type, 101 were intestinal, 19 were pancreatobiliary and 24 were oncocytic. These types were significantly associated with clinicopathological factors including sex (p=0.0032), age (p=0.00924), ectatic duct size (p=0.0245), detection of mural nodules (p=4.09×10 −6 ), histological grade (p<2.20×10 −16 ), macroscopic types with differential involvement of the pancreatic duct system (p=3.91×10 −5 ), invasive phenotypes (p=3.34×10 −12 ), stage (p<2.20×10 −16 ) and recurrence (p=0.00574). Kaplan–Meier analysis showed significant differences in patient survival by morphological type (p=5.24×10 −6 ). Survival rates at 5 and 10 years, respectively, were 0.937 (95% CI 0.892 to 0.984) for patients with gastric-type IPMNs; 0.886 (95% CI 0.813 to 0.965) and 0.685 (95% CI 0.553 to 0.849) for those with intestinal-type IPMNs; 0.839 (95% CI 0.684 to 1.000) and 0.734 (95% CI 0.526 to 1.000) for those with oncocytic-type IPMNs; and 0.520 (95% CI 0.298 to 0.909) and undetermined for those with pancreatobiliary-type IPMNs. Analysis by the Cox proportional hazards model comparing prognostic risks determined by stage and the morphological and macroscopic types indicated that staging was the most significant predictor of survival (p=3.68×10 −8 ) followed by the morphological type (p=0.0435). Furthermore, the morphological type remained a significant predictor in a subcohort of invasive cases (p=0.0089). Conclusion: In this multicentre retrospective analysis, the morphological type of IPMN appears to be an independent predictor of patient prognosis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/gut.2010.210567

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 337

Metadata

Authors
Furukawa, T., Hatori, T., Fujita, I., Yamamoto, M., Kobayashi, M., Ohike, N., Morohoshi, T., Egawa, S., Unno, M., Takao, S., Osako, M., Yonezawa, S., Mino-Kenudson, M., Lauwers, G. Y., Yamaguchi, H., Ban, S., & Shimizu, M.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2010-12-30
Volume
60
Issue
4
Pages
509-516
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2134145309
Cited by
337
References
0
FWCI
9.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prognostic relevance of morphological types of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.2010.210567
The paper
Furukawa, T., Hatori, T., Fujita, I., Yamamoto, M., Kobayashi, M., Ohike, N., Morohoshi, T., Egawa, S., Unno, M., Takao, S., Osako, M., Yonezawa, S., Mino-Kenudson, M., Lauwers, G. Y., Yamaguchi, H., Ban, S., & Shimizu, M. (2011). Prognostic relevance of morphological types of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2010.210567

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.