Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22801663›Full record

ReviewDer Nervenarzt2012

[Treatment of brain tumor patients: hyperthermia, hyperbaric oxygenation, electric fields or nanoparticles].

M Platten, W Wick

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 99% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M PlattenAbteilung Neuroonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, INF 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Deutschland. michael.platten@med.uni-heidelberg.de
W Wick
Chirurgische Universitätsklinik Heidelberg · DEHeidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite considerable advancements in the therapy of malignant glioma in recent years with modern radiation and surgical techniques, alkylating and antiangiogenic chemotherapy, as well as molecular-based treatment decisions, treatment outcomes are mostly unsatisfactory. Understandably, patients often ask for experimental, sometimes unusual therapeutic modalities and this should be integrated into the clinical practice. In addition to experimental therapeutic approaches based on novel drugs, viral agents, immunotherapy and radiation approaches, experimental procedures of interest for patients particularly encompass mechanical approaches with the aim at physically altering the tumor tissue by temperature, oxygenation or magnetization. These mechanical procedures are based on intuitive concepts and promise fewer side effects than other experimental approaches. In addition, the requirements for approval by medical device regulations in terms of proof of efficacy are generally less stringent. As a consequence approaches, such as hyperbaric oxygenation, hyperthermia and electric fields, which are often heavily advertised and in part reimbursed by health insurances, have been used for many years, often by centers not specialized in the treatment of brain tumor patients, although sound data from prospective controlled clinical trials that determine which patients in which situation may benefit, are generally lacking. In this review we review these clinical therapeutic approaches.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsBrain NeoplasmsElectric Stimulation TherapyHumansHyperbaric OxygenationHyperthermia, InducedNanocapsulesAntineoplastic AgentsNanocapsules

Identifiers

PMID22801663
OpenAlexW107009562

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.