Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25616769›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology2015

Efficacy and toxicity of second-course ophthalmic artery chemosurgery for retinoblastoma.

Jasmine H Francis, David H Abramson, Y Pierre Gobin, Brian P Marr, Irwin Tendler, Scott E Brodie, Ira J Dunkel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Prevalence of refractive errors in children with retinoblastoma.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Retinoblastoma.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2015
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jasmine H FrancisOphthalmic Oncology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Department of Ophthalmology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York. Electronic address: francij1@mskcc.org.
David H AbramsonOphthalmic Oncology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Department of Ophthalmology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York.
Y Pierre GobinOphthalmic Oncology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Interventional Neuroradiology, Departments of Radiology, Neurosurgery, and Neurology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York.
Brian P MarrOphthalmic Oncology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Department of Ophthalmology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York.
Irwin TendlerDepartment of Pediatrics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Scott E BrodieDepartment of Ophthalmology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Ira J DunkelDepartment of Pediatrics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USCornell University · USIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAssess the usefulness of second-course ophthalmic artery chemosurgery (OAC) for patients with intraocular retinoblastoma that recurred after prior OAC. This study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of second-course OAC.

designSingle-arm retrospective study of 29 eyes of 30 patients treated with second-course OAC at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between May 2006 and July 2013, with a median follow-up of 25.9 months.

participantsRetinoblastoma patients who underwent a course of OAC, with a minimum of 2 months of progression-free follow-up at monthly examinations, but who subsequently received additional OAC for recurrent tumor.

methodsTo determine efficacy, Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were generated and the Mantel-Cox test was used to compare curves. To determine toxicity, electroretinography (ERG) amplitudes were measured in response to 30-Hz photopic flicker stimulation before and after OAC treatment; systemic adverse events were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE 4.0).

main outcome measuresFor efficacy, ocular progression-free survival, ocular event-free survival (e.g., enucleation, external-beam radiation, or intravitreal melphalan), and ocular survival. For toxicity, peak-to-peak comparisons between ERG studies before and after OAC treatment and CTCAE 4.0-graded systemic adverse events.

resultsFifty percent of all recurrences were within 4.4 months and 90% were within 16 months of completion of the first course of OAC. The 2-year Kaplan-Meier ocular survival, event-free survival, and progression-free survival estimates after second-course OAC were 82.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 60.1%-93.2%), 57.3% (95% CI, 36.1%-73.7%), and 26.5% (95% CI, 11.0%-45.0%), respectively. All eyes without vitreous seeding were progression free, whereas eyes with vitreous seeding were associated significantly with worse ocular survival after second-course OAC (P = 0.03). After second-course OAC, 90% of eyes had stable or improved ERG responses. Of all evaluable cases, there was no increased risk of systemic toxicity during the second course compared with the initial course of OAC.

conclusionsRetinoblastoma eyes requiring second-course OAC after initial OAC treatment have good salvage rates, and the treatment has an acceptable ocular and systemic toxicity profile. However, these eyes often require additional (third- or fourth-course) OAC or other treatment methods because of progression of disease after second-line OAC, particularly if vitreous seeds are present at the time of initial OAC failure.

Indexed as

Infusions, Intra-ArterialAdolescentAntineoplastic Agents, AlkylatingChildChild, PreschoolDisease-Free SurvivalElectroretinographyFemaleHumansInfantMaleMelphalanNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm SeedingOphthalmic ArteryRetinaAntineoplastic Agents, AlkylatingMelphalan

Identifiers

PMID25616769
PMCPMC4994525
OpenAlexW2043504927

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.