ArticleRadiology and oncology2010
Antigen expression on recurrent meningioma cells.
Article in Radiology and oncology, 2010. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Expression of Cathepsins B, D, and G in WHO Grade I Meningioma.Frontiers in surgery · 2019Article
- A point-of-care microfluidic biochip for quantification of CD64 expression from whole blood for sepsis stratification.Nature communications · 2017Article
- CD133: holy of grail of neuro-oncology or promiscuous red-herring?Cell proliferation · 2012Review
- Brain meningioma invading and destructing the skull bone: replacement of the missing bone in vivo.Radiology and oncology · 2011Article
- CD133/prominin1 is prognostic for GBM patient's survival, but inversely correlated with cysteine cathepsins' expression in glioblastoma derived spheroids.Radiology and oncology · 2011Article
- Frequent MGMT (0(6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase) hypermethylation in long-term survivors of glioblastoma: a single institution experience.Radiology and oncology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMeningiomas are intracranial brain tumours that frequently recur. Recurrence rates up to 20% in 20 years for benign meningiomas, up to 80% for atypical meningiomas and up to 100% for malignant meningiomas, have been reported. The most important prognostic factors for meningioma recurrence are meningioma grade, meningioma invasiveness and radicality of neurosurgical resection. The aim of our study was to evaluate the differences in antigenic expression on the surface of meningioma cells between recurrent and non-recurrent meningiomas.
methods19 recurrent meningiomas and 35 non-recurrent meningiomas were compared regarding the expression of MIB-1 antigen, progesterone receptors, cathepsin B and cathepsin L, using immunohistochemistry.
resultsMIB-1 antigen expression was higher in the recurrent meningioma group (p=0.001). No difference in progesterone receptor status between recurrent and non-recurrent meningiomas was confirmed. Immunohistochemical intensity scores for cathepsin B (p= 0.007) and cathepsin L (p<0.001) were both higher in the recurrent than in the non-recurrent meningioma group.
conclusions[corrected] MIB-1 antigen expression is higher in recurrent compared to non-recurrent meningiomas. There is no difference in expression of progesterone receptors between recurrent and non-recurrent meningiomas. Cathepsins B and L are expressed more in recurrent meningiomas.
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.