ReviewCancers2024
Combined Merkel Cell Carcinoma and Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Merkel Cell Carcinoma With Divergent Differentiation-Or Something Else? A Triphasic Cutaneous Carcinoma With Lineage Plasticity.Journal of cutaneous pathology · 2026Review
- Merkel Cell Carcinoma: Evolving Therapeutics, Continued Challenges.Head & neck · 2025Review
- Review
- What is the predominant etiological factor for Merkel cell carcinoma in Turkey: viral infection or sun exposure?BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Coexistence of neuroendocrine carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin after kidney transplantation: a case report.Archives of craniofacial surgery · 2025Article
- A Rare Case of Combined Merkel Cell Cancer and Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Face in an Older Woman of Southern Italy.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Collision tumours: our recent experience.Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2024Article
- Mast cell density in Merkel cell carcinoma and its correlation with prognostic features and MCPyV status: a pilot study.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Combined Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) have classically been regarded as more aggressive than conventional, pure, Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCPyV)-positive MCC. It is still unknown whether combined MCC and SCC are more aggressive than pure, MCPyV-negative MCC, and the origin of both the SCC and MCC elements of these combined tumors has not been elucidated. The main objective of this systematic review was to assess whether combined MCC and SCC tumors are associated with a worse prognosis than pure MCC; the secondary goals were the characterization of the clinical and histopathological features of these combined neoplasms. A total of 38 studies, including 152 patients, were selected for review. In total, 76% of the cases were MCPyV-negative, whereas 4% were MCPyV-positive. The most frequent histopathological pattern was that of an SCC in situ combined with a dermal MCC (36%), followed by both an in situ and invasive SCC combined with a dermal MCC (20%). Forty-seven percent of all cases fitted in the morphology of the so-called "collision tumors". Three combined MCC cases that would fit in the morphological category of collision tumors presented both squamous and neuroendocrine elements in their respective nodal metastases. The mean overall survival was 36 months, comparable to that of pure, MCPyV-negative MCC. This review found similarly aggressive behavior for combined MCC and SCC and pure, MCPyV-negative MCC. Preliminary data strongly suggest that all MCPyV-negative MCC tumors, whether combined or pure, are part of a common spectrum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.