ArticleOncology letters2017
Incidence trends in high-grade primary brain tumors in males and females.
Article in Oncology letters, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy for glioblastoma in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Do the indices of deprivation or smoking affect post-operative 1-year mortality in patients undergoing a craniotomy for a brain tumour in a public healthcare system?Acta neurochirurgica · 2023Article
- Influence of scalp block on oncological outcomes of high-grade glioma in adult patients with and without isocitrate dehydrogenase-1 mutation.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Incidence of high grade gliomas presenting as radiographically non-enhancing lesions: experience in 111 surgically treated non-enhancing gliomas with tissue diagnosis.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2020Article
- Texture analysis of diffusion weighted imaging for the evaluation of glioma heterogeneity based on different regions of interest.Oncology letters · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The focus of the present review is to investigate whether there is a variation in the incidence rates between male and female patients with high-grade primary brain tumors and if there are altered incidence rates associated with the time at which they were diagnosed. Previous studies identified in internationally peer-reviewed journals were identified using a systematic search of the PubMed database. Due to the difficulties in data interpretation, studies that exclusively included patient data classified prior to the 2nd edition of the World Health Organization histological classification system of brain tumors were excluded. The overall incidence rates and incidence trends of male and female patients were analyzed separately. The mean age-adjusted overall incidence rate in the male population was 1.27 per 100,000 compared with 0.89 per 100,000 in the female population. The variance between the two genders differed and a Wilcoxon rank-sum test indicated that there was no significant difference in the incidence rate of high-grade primary brain tumors between males and females (P=0.3658). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in incidence rate trend between 1996-2004 and 2005-2010 for male or female populations (P=0.101 and P=0.472, respectively). The results from the present systematic review did not demonstrate a significant difference in incidence rate between the two genders. Therefore, the results from the current study are considered to be preliminary and further studies are required to elucidate this issue.
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.