ArticleDer Pathologe2008
[Meningiomas: multiparametric approach for risk stratification and grading].
Article in Der Pathologe, 2008. 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.
- Article
- Isolation and characterization of tumor stem-like cells from human meningiomas.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prognosis of the generally benign meningiomas is mainly an issue of the likelihood of recurrence, which increases with WHO grade (7-20% in WHO grade I, 29-40% in WHO grade II, and 50-78% in WHO grade III meningiomas). Among clinical parameters the most important prognostic factor is the completeness of neurosurgical tumor resection. Among histopathological prognostic parameters the mitotic activity is the most important one. As the cutoffs of the mitotic index (MI) are defined for each grade by the WHO classification of brain tumors and because the MI can be applied as the sole grading criterion, the reliable and reproducible assessment of the MI is crucial for an appropriate risk stratification. This is provided by immunohistochemical mitosis markers, i.e., phospho-histone H3 (PHH3). The PHH3 method is superior to the conventional mitosis counting method and therefore allows a more reliable risk stratification. The Ki-67 labeling index provides additional prognostic information, especially in prognostically ambiguous meningiomas. Cytogenetically, the deletion of the short arm of one chromosome 1 (1p-) is an unfavorable prognostic parameter and is correlated with a high risk of recurrence. The enzyme reaction for alkaline phosphatase (ALPL) is a fast and efficient screening method, which strongly indicates an intact chromosome 1 in cases with a positive enzyme reaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18810442What 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.