ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2011
Evaluating the incidence and utility of microscopic metastatic dissemination as diagnosed by lumbar cerebro-spinal fluid (CSF) samples in children with newly diagnosed intracranial ependymoma.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Intracranial Ependymoma in Children: Frequency, Molecular Characteristics, Treatment, and Outcome in the Prospective HIT Series.The oncologist · 2019Trial
- Final results of the second prospective AIEOP protocol for pediatric intracranial ependymoma.Neuro-oncology · 2016Trial
- Optimizing outcomes in intracranial ependymoma: a contemporary review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Current and Emerging Methods of Management of Ependymoma.Current oncology reports · 2019Review
- Rethinking childhood ependymoma: a retrospective, multi-center analysis reveals poor long-term overall survival.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2017Article
- Management of hydrocephalus in pediatric metastatic tumors of the posterior fossa at presentation.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2017Article
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 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ependymomas are the third most common central nervous system (CNS) tumor in childhood. After resection, the standard evaluation of intracranial ependymomas includes a post-contrast spine MRI and a lumbar CSF sample to evaluate for metastasis. Although it is estimated that 10-30% of patients will present with metastatic disease, it is unclear what percentage of metastatic disease is solely identified microscopically via lumbar cytology versus that identified as bulky disease on post-contrast spinal MRIs. We retrospectively evaluated all patients at our institution with intracranial ependymoma diagnosed between January 1991 and June 2008 in an effort to evaluate prognostic factors, survival outcomes and incidence of metastatic disease. Sixty-one evaluable patients were identified: 46% were male and the mean age at diagnosis was 64 months (2.04-196.92). The most common tumor location was the posterior fossa (77%) and 64% of patients achieved a gross total resection with initial surgery. Five-year event-free and overall survivals were 39 ± 7% and 87 ± 4%, respectively. Approximately 10% of patients presented with bulky metastatic disease as seen on post-contrast spine MRI. No patient whose spine MRI was negative for tumor had positive lumbar CSF cytology. These data highlight the rarity of patients who present with microscopic metastatic disease noted on lumbar cytology alone and suggest that evaluation of lumbar cytology may not be useful in patients with negative post-contrast spine MRIs. Future prospective trials may be helpful in validating this conclusion before eliminating this procedure as part of the standard evaluation in newly diagnosed ependymoma patients.
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.