Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28123914›Full record

ArticleCureus2016

Bevacizumab for Treatment-Refractory Pain Control in Neurofibromatosis Patients.

Xu W Linda, Lawrence D Recht

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2016. 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
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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, 5 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Xu W LindaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine.
Lawrence D RechtDepartment of Neurology, Stanford University School of Medicine.
Stanford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveChronic pain is a well-known morbidity associated with neurofibromatosis (NF) for which better therapies are needed. Surgery, radiation, and pain medications have been utilized, but often fail to relieve debilitating pain. One patient at our institution was noted to have near complete resolution of pain after treatment with bevacizumab for progressive neurologic deficit associated with NF2, suggesting its potential as an effective pain control method. We aim to better characterize the use of bevacizumab for pain control in this subset of patients.  Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 38 NF patients treated at our institution.   Results: Of the 38 total NF patients, we found that 63% reported chronic pain, with 18% reporting chronic opiate usage. Nine patients with chronic pain were considered for bevacizumab treatment and five went on to receive infusions. Of these patients, four out of five had previous surgical debulking and two out of five had previous radiation for attempted pain control. One patient had a lesion not amenable to surgery or radiation. Patients received a median of 13 cycles of bevacizumab, and four out of five patients reported a decrease in subjective pain. All patients that had pain relief had a relapse of pain symptoms when the dose was reduced or infusions were paused. Seventy-five percent were able to decrease opiate use. No major complications were noted. All five patients have elected to continue infusions for pain control.  Conclusion: Bevacizumab was, in general, well tolerated and should be considered as a treatment option in NF patients with chronic pain refractory or not amenable to surgical decompression and debulking, radiation, and pain medication.

Indexed as

bevacizumabneurofibromatosispain controlvegf

Identifiers

PMID28123914
PMCPMC5249264
OpenAlexW2566621707

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.