Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25864099›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2015

Completeness and concordancy of WHO grade assignment for brain and central nervous system tumors in the United States, 2004-2011.

Ryan L Lym, Quinn T Ostrom, Carol Kruchko, Marta Couce, Daniel J Brat, David N Louis, Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  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

7 authors.

Ryan L LymCase Western Reserve University School of Medicine, 11100 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, USA, rll63@case.edu.
Quinn T Ostrom
Carol Kruchko
Marta Couce
Daniel J Brat
David N Louis
Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan

Funding

INTEGRATION OF BEST PRACTICES FOR COLLECTION AND REPORTING OF PRIMARY MALIGNANT AU58DP003831 · DP · CENTRAL BRAIN TUMOR REGISTRY OF THE U S · PI KRUCHKO, CAROL · 2011 to 2014
$499k
NCCDPHP CDC HHS 5U58DP00381-04NCCDPHP CDC HHS U58 DP003831
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Central nervous system (CNS) tumors are categorized and graded for clinical and research purposes according to the World Health Organization (WHO) scheme which segregates tumors by histological type and predicted biological behavior. However, reporting of WHO grade in pathological reports is inconsistent despite its collection in cancer registration. We studied the completeness, concordancy, and yearly trends in the collection of WHO grade for primary CNS tumors between 2004 and 2011. Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program were analyzed for the percentage of histologically diagnosed primary CNS tumor cases with concordantly documented WHO grades between 2004 and 2011. Yearly trends were calculated with annual percentage changes (APC) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Completeness and concordancy of the collection of WHO grade varied significantly by histological type and year. The percentage of cases with documented WHO grade increased significantly from 2004 to 2011: 39.0% of cases in 2004 had documented WHO grade, while 77.5% of cases had documented grade in 2011 (APC, 10.3; 95% CI: 9.0, 11.5). Among cases with documented WHO grade, the percentage graded concordantly increased significantly from 89.1% in 2004 to 93.7% in 2007 (APC, 1.8; 95% CI: 1.0, 2.6) and these values varied over time by histological type. One common trend among all histologies was a significant increase in the percentage of cases with documented WHO grade. A sizeable proportion of reported CNS tumors collected by cancer registrars have undocumented WHO grade, while a much smaller proportion are graded discordantly. Data collection on grade has improved in completeness and concordancy over time. Efforts to further improve collection of this variable are essential for clinical care and the epidemiological surveillance of CNS tumors.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsCentral Nervous System NeoplasmsHumansNeoplasm GradingPrognosisSEER ProgramTime FactorsUnited StatesWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID25864099
PMCPMC4441798

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.