Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19212775›Full record

ReviewChild's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery2009

Classification and controversies in pathology of ependymomas.

Catherine Godfraind

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review and update on pediatric ependymoma.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2023
    Review
  2. Journal of clinical pathology · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Central nervous system ependymoma: clinical implications of the new molecular classification, treatment guidelines and controversial issues.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2019
    Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Supratentorial "vascular" variant of ependymoma: a lesser known morphologic variant and a diagnostic pitfall.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2016
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Low-grade ependymoma with late metastasis: autopsy case study and literature review.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2015
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Catherine GodfraindInstitute of Neuroscience, Laboratory of Pathology, Université catholique de Louvain, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200, Brussels, Belgium. catherine.godfraind@uclouvain.be
de Duve Institute · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBailey and Cushing established ependymoma as a brain tumour entity in the first brain tumour classification (1926). Diagnosis of ependymomas is not subject to controversy as long as other tumours presenting ependymoma-like features have been ruled out. Grading conversely is a source of debate. Description of histological features establishing diagnosis and grading of ependymomas may help to better understand this controversy.

methodsLiterature has been reviewed using PubMed with the following key words: ependymoma, +/- prognosis, +/- biomaker, +/- grading, +/- immunohistochemistry, +/- proliferative index.

resultsGrading controversy arises from elusive WHO features and individual characteristics of ependymomas including tumour location, tumour pattern/variant and variable expression of biomarkers.

conclusionThere is a need for a grading scheme with a proven general ability to dissociate grades, and to predict individual clinical evolution. Only then will stratified and targeted therapeutics for ependymal tumours be possible.

Indexed as

BrainBrain NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialEpendymomaHumansNeoplasm Staging

Identifiers

PMID19212775
OpenAlexW1990237927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.