Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24233257›Full record

ReviewNeurosurgical review2014

Imaging changes following stereotactic radiosurgery for metastatic intracranial tumors: differentiating pseudoprogression from tumor progression and its effect on clinical practice.

Jacob Ruzevick, Lawrence Kleinberg, Daniele Rigamonti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neurosurgical review, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. What happens to brain outside the thermal ablation zones? An assessment of needle-based therapeutic ultrasound in survival swine.International journal of hyperthermia : the official journal of European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology, North American Hyperthermia Group · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. [EJNMMI research · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jacob RuzevickDepartment of Neurological Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Phipps Building, Room 126, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA, jruzevick@jhmi.edu.
Lawrence Kleinberg
Daniele Rigamonti
Johns Hopkins Medicine · USJohns Hopkins University · USNeurological Surgery · US

Funding

Translational Research Central ServicesP30CA006973 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Rosalie Wollett · 1985 to 2026
$208.6M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006973
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stereotactic radiosurgery has become standard adjuvant treatment for patients with metastatic intracranial lesions. There has been a growing appreciation for benign imaging changes following radiation that are difficult to distinguish from true tumor progression. These imaging changes, termed pseudoprogression, carry significant implications for patient management. In this review, we discuss the current understanding of pseudoprogression in metastatic brain lesions, research to differentiate pseudoprogression from true progression, and clinical implications of pseudoprogression on treatment decisions.

Indexed as

RadiosurgeryBrain NeoplasmsDisease ProgressionHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, Local

Identifiers

PMID24233257
PMCPMC4086651
OpenAlexW1979604271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.