ArticleBritish journal of cancer2003
Proliferation and aneusomy predict survival of young patients with astrocytoma grade II.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spontaneous regression of residual low-grade cerebellar pilocytic astrocytomas in children.Pediatric radiology · 2005Article
- Low-Grade Gliomas in Adults.Current treatment options in neurology · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The clinical course of astrocytoma grade II (AII) is highly variable and not reflected by histological characteristics. As one of the best prognostic factors, higher age identifies rapid progressive A II. For patients over 35 years of age, an aggressive treatment is normally propagated. For patients under 35 years, there is no clear guidance for treatment choices, and therefore also the necessity of histopathological diagnosis is often questioned. We studied the additional prognostic value of the proliferation index and the detection of genetic aberrations for patients with A II. The tumour samples were obtained by stereotactic biopsy or tumour resection and divided into two age groups, that is 18-34 years (n=19) and > or =35 years (n=28). Factors tested included the proliferation (Ki-67) index, and numerical aberrations for chromosomes 1, 7, and 10, as detected by in situ hybridisation (ISH). The results show that age is a prognostic indicator when studied in the total patient group, with patients above 35 years showing a relatively poor prognosis. Increased proliferation index in the presence of aneusomy appears to identify a subgroup of patients with poor prognosis more accurately than predicted by proliferation index alone. We conclude that histologically classified cases of A II comprise a heterogeneous group of tumours with different biological and genetic constitution, which exhibit a highly variable clinical course. Immunostaining for Ki-67 in combination with the detection of aneusomy by ISH allows the identification of a subgroup of patients with rapidly progressive A II. This is an extra argument not to defer stereotactic biopsy in young patients with radiological suspicion of A II.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.