International consensus on the initial diagnostic workup of cancer of unknown primary

Strate, Iris van der; Kazemzadeh, Fatemeh; Nagtegaal, Irıs D.; Robbrecht, Debbie G.J.; Wouw, A. van de; Padilla, Catarina S.; Duijts, Saskia F. A.; Esteller, Manel; Greco, F. Anthony; Pavlidis, Nicholas; Qaseem, Amir; Snæbjörnsson, Pétur; Zanten, Sophie Veldhuijzen van; Loef, Caroline

doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103868

Cited by 13 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Eine PET/CT zu Beginn der Diagnostik ist wünschenswert, jedoch beim CUP-Syndrom nicht gänzlich Bestandteil internationaler Leitlinien [12,14,15,16,17]. Bis heute gibt es viele verschiedene Richtlinien für das Management von CUP-Syndromen, was gleichzeitig die Schwie-rigkeit des klinischen Ansatzes veranschaulicht.…”

Section: Radiologische Diagnostik Mit Stagingunclassified

Zervikales CUP-Syndrom: Diagnostik und Therapie

Lammert,

Abo-Madyan,

Huber

et al. 2024

Laryngorhinootologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Radiologische Diagnostik Mit Stagingunclassified

Zervikales CUP-Syndrom: Diagnostik und Therapie

Lammert,

Abo-Madyan,

Huber

et al. 2024

Laryngorhinootologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, light microscopy combined with IHC can determine the tissue origin of only approximately 30% of CUP cases 5 , and no single pathological marker currently enables conclusive diagnosis. Importantly, CUP guidelines, such as those from the Dutch Oncoline, ESMO, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), and China Anti-Cancer Association (CACA), contain numerous differences in the recommended specific IHC markers 6 . Therefore, clinicians must further determine which IHC markers to use according to geographical differences in tumor incidence and other clinical findings.…”

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

New era: prospects for managing cancer of unknown primary

Li,

Bai,

et al. 2023

Cancer Biol Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…History and physical examination; full blood count; along with serum markers, a CT scan of the chest/abdomen/pelvis, and a biopsy of the most accessible lesion, followed by immunohistochemical testing should be the starting point. On the other hand, the symptom-guided magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or ultrasound, a positron emission tomography/computerised tomography (PET/CT) scan, targeted gene panels, immunohistochemical markers, and whole genome sequencing remain debatable [ 3 ]. With regard to organisational recommendations, namely, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), and Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), the histological evaluation is standard and is based on morphology and algorithmic immunohistochemistry (IHC) [ 4 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Biology to Diagnosis and Treatment: The Ariadne’s Thread in Cancer of Unknown Primary

Mathew

Aliyuda

Taiwo

et al. 2023

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) encloses a group of heterogeneous tumours, the primary sites for which cannot be identified at the time of diagnosis, despite extensive investigations. CUP has always posed major challenges both in its diagnosis and management, leading to the hypothesis that it is rather a distinct entity with specific genetic and phenotypic aberrations, considering the regression or dormancy of the primary tumour; the development of early, uncommon systemic metastases; and the resistance to therapy. Patients with CUP account for 1–3% of all human malignancies and can be categorised into two prognostic subsets according to their clinicopathologic characteristics at presentation. The diagnosis of CUP mainly depends on the standard evaluation comprising a thorough medical history; complete physical examination; histopathologic morphology and algorithmic immunohistochemistry assessment; and CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis. However, physicians and patients do not fare well with these criteria and often perform additional time-consuming evaluations to identify the primary tumour site to guide treatment decisions. The development of molecularly guided diagnostic strategies has emerged to complement traditional procedures but has been disappointing thus far. In this review, we present the latest data on CUP regarding the biology, molecular profiling, classification, diagnostic workup, and treatment.

show abstract

International consensus on the initial diagnostic workup of cancer of unknown primary

Cited by 13 publications

References 39 publications

Zervikales CUP-Syndrom: Diagnostik und Therapie

Zervikales CUP-Syndrom: Diagnostik und Therapie

New era: prospects for managing cancer of unknown primary

From Biology to Diagnosis and Treatment: The Ariadne’s Thread in Cancer of Unknown Primary

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About