Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 297

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Molecular Classification of Rhabdomyosarcoma—Genotypic and Phenotypic Determinants of Diagnosis

Open access
Davicioni, Elai, Anderson, Michael J., Finckenstein, Friedrich Graf, Lynch, James C., Qualman, Stephen J., Shimada, Hiroyuki, Schofield, Deborah E., Buckley, Jonathan D., Meyer, William H., Sorensen, Poul H.B., Triche, Timothy J.·2009·The American Journal of Pathology
DOI 10.2353/ajpath.2009.080631
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) in children occurs as two major histological subtypes, embryonal (ERMS) and alveolar (ARMS). ERMS is associated with an 11p15.5 loss of heterozygosity (LOH) and may be confused with nonmyogenic, non-RMS soft tissue sarcomas. ARMS expresses the product of a genomic translocation that fuses FOXO1 (FKHR) with either PAX3 or PAX7 (P-F); however, at least 25% of cases lack these translocations. Here, we describe a genomic-based classification scheme that is derived from the combined gene expression profiling and LOH analysis of 160 cases of RMS and non-RMS soft tissue sarcomas that is at variance with conventional histopathological schemes. We found that gene expression profiles and patterns of LOH of ARMS cases lacking P-F translocations are indistinguishable from conventional ERMS cases. A subset of tumors that has been histologically classified as RMS lack myogenic gene expression. However, classification based on gene expression is possible using as few as five genes with an estimated error rate of less than 5%. Using immunohistochemistry, we characterized two markers, HMGA2 and TFAP2ss, which facilitate the differential diagnoses of ERMS and P-F RMS, respectively, using clinical material. These objectively derived molecular classes are based solely on genomic analysis at the time of diagnosis and are highly reproducible. Adoption of these molecular criteria may offer a more clinically relevant diagnostic scheme, thus potentially improving patient management and therapeutic RMS outcomes.

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 · 10.2353/ajpath.2009.080631

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Cited by

See all 297

Metadata

Authors
Davicioni, E., Anderson, M. J., Finckenstein, F. G., Lynch, J. C., Qualman, S. J., Shimada, H., Schofield, D. E., Buckley, J. D., Meyer, W. H., Sorensen, P. H. B., & Triche, T. J.
Venue
The American Journal of Pathology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-02
Volume
174
Issue
2
Pages
550-564
ISSN
0002-9440 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2353/ajpath.2009.080631
OpenAlex
W1504229479
Cited by
297
References
37
FWCI
20.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

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.