The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Tumors with a Morphologically Apparent High-Grade Component: A Pathway Distinct from Poorly Differentiated Neuroendocrine Carcinomas
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: Most well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WD-NET) of the enteropancreatic system are low-intermediate grade (G1, G2). Elevated proliferation demonstrated by either a brisk mitotic rate (>20/10 high power fields) or high Ki-67 index (>20%) defines a group of aggressive neoplasms designated as high-grade (G3) neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC). High-grade NEC is equated with poorly differentiated NEC (PD-NEC) and is associated with a dismal outcome. Progression of WD-NETs to a high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasm very rarely occurs and their clinicopathologic and molecular features need to be characterized. Experimental Design: We investigated 31 cases of WD-NETs with evidence of a component of a high-grade neoplasm. The primary sites included pancreas, small bowel, bile duct, and rectum. Histopathology of the cases was retrospectively reviewed and selected IHC and gene mutation analyses performed. Results: The high-grade component occurred either within the primary tumor (48%) or at metastatic sites (52%). The clinical presentation, radiographic features, biomarkers, and the genotype of these WD-NETs with high-grade component remained akin to those of G1–G2 WD-NETs. The median disease-specific survival (DSS) was 55 months (16–119 months), and 2-year and 5-year DSS was 88% and 49%, respectively—significantly better than that of a comparison group of true PD-NEC (DSS 11 months). Conclusions: Mixed grades can occur in WD-NETs, which are distinguished from PD-NECs by their unique phenotype, proliferative indices, and the genotype. This phenomenon of mixed grade in WD-NET provides additional evidence to the growing recognition that the current WHO G3 category contains both WD-NETs as well as PD-NECs. Clin Cancer Res; 22(4); 1011–7. ©2015 AACR.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Reubi, J. C., Schär, J.-C., Waser, B., Wenger, S., Heppeler, A., Schmitt, J. S., & Mäcke, H. R. (2000) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s002590050034 · Cited by 1,127
Cited by
Rindi, G., Klimstra, D. S., Abedi-Ardekani, B., Asa, S. L., Bosman, F. T., Brambilla, E., Busam, K. J., de Krijger, R. R., Dietel, M., El-Naggar, A. K., et al. (2018) · Modern Pathology · doi:10.1038/s41379-018-0110-y · Cited by 1,163
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Tang, L. H., Untch, B. R., Reidy, D. L., O'Reilly, E., Dhall, D., Jih, L., Basturk, O., Allen, P. J., & Klimstra, D. S.
- Venue
- Clinical Cancer Research
- Published
- 2016-02-14
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1011-1017
- ISSN
- 1078-0432 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-3265
- OpenAlex
- W1794138423
- Cited by
- 352
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 22.70
- 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: Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Tumors with a Morphologically Apparent High-Grade Component: A Pathway Distinct from Poorly Differentiated Neuroendocrine Carcinomas. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-15-0548
- The paper
- Tang, L. H., Untch, B. R., Reidy, D. L., O'Reilly, E., Dhall, D., Jih, L., Basturk, O., Allen, P. J., & Klimstra, D. S. (2016). Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Tumors with a Morphologically Apparent High-Grade Component: A Pathway Distinct from Poorly Differentiated Neuroendocrine Carcinomas. Clinical Cancer Research. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-15-0548
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.