Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29189165›Full record

ReviewCurrent neuropharmacology2018

Childhood Medulloblastoma: Current Therapies, Emerging Molecular Landscape and Newer Therapeutic Insights.

Soumen Khatua, Anne Song, Divyaswathi Citla Sridhar, Stephen C Mack

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current neuropharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Mechanistic insights into medulloblastoma relapse.Pharmacology & therapeutics · 2024
    Review
  12. Evolution of neurosurgical advances and nuances in medulloblastoma therapy.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Intracranial Tumors in the First Year of Life.Advances and technical standards in neurosurgery · 2023
    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

4 authors.

Soumen KhatuaDepartment of Pediatrics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Pediatrics Houston, Texas, United States.
Anne SongDepartment of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Pediatrics Houston, Texas, United States.
Divyaswathi Citla SridharDepartment of Pediatrics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Pediatrics Houston, Texas, United States.
Stephen C MackDepartment of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Pediatrics Houston, Texas, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedulloblastoma is the most common malignant brain tumor in children, currently treated uniformly based on histopathology and clinico-radiological risk stratification leading to unpredictable relapses and therapeutic failures. Identification of molecular subgroups have thrown light on the reasons for these and now reveals clues to profile molecularly based personalized therapy against these tumors.

methodsResearch and online contents were evaluated for pediatric medulloblastoma which included latest information on the molecular subgroups and their clinical relevance and update on efforts to translate them into clinics.

resultsScientific endeavors over the last decade have clearly identified four molecular variants (WNT, SHH, Group 3, and Group 4) and their demographic, genomic, and epigenetic profile. Latest revelations include significant heterogeneity within these subgroups and 12 different subtypes of MB are now identified with disparate outcomes and biology. These findings have important implications for stratification and profiling future clinical trials against these formidable tumors.

conclusionWith the continued outpouring of genomic/epigenomic data of these molecular subgroups and evolution of further subtypes in each subgroup, the challenge lies in comprehensive evaluation of these informations. Current and future endeavors are now needed to profile personalized therapy for each child based on the molecular risk stratification of medulloblastoma, with a hope to improve survival outcome and reduce relapses.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsChildHumansMedulloblastomaChildhood medulloblastomaepigenetic machinerymolecular subtypesnewer treatment strategiestargeted therapytherapeutic resistance.

Identifiers

PMID29189165
PMCPMC6120114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.