ArticleNeurosurgical review2018
Predictors for a further local in-brain progression after re-craniotomy of locally recurrent cerebral metastases.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Multidisciplinary management strategies for recurrent brain metastasis after prior radiotherapy: An overview.Neuro-oncology · 2025Review
- The role of surgery in recurrent local cerebral metastases: a multi-institutional retrospective analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
- Article
- Opportunities and Alternatives of Modern Radiation Oncology and Surgery for the Management of Resectable Brain Metastases.Cancers · 2023Review
- Neurosurgical resection for locally recurrent brain metastasis.Neuro-oncology · 2021Article
- Review
- Risk factors for in-brain local progression in elderly patients after resection of cerebral metastases.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Is 5-ALA fluorescence of cerebral metastases a prognostic factor for local recurrence and overall survival?Journal of neuro-oncology · 2019Article
- CyberKnife Radiosurgery in Recurrent Brain Metastases: Do the Benefits Outweigh the Risks?Cureus · 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Treatment of recurrent cerebral metastases is an emerging challenge due to the high local failure rate after surgery or radiosurgery and the improved prognosis of patients with malignancies. A total of 36 patients with 37 metastases who underwent surgery for a local in-brain progression of a cerebral metastasis after previous metastasectomy were retrospectively analyzed. Degree of surgical resection on an early postoperative MRI within 72 h after surgery was correlated with the local in-brain progression rate and overall survival. Complete surgical resection of locally recurrent cerebral metastases as confirmed by early postoperative MRI could only be achieved in 37.8%. Detection of residual tumor tissue on an early MRI following recurrent metastasis surgery correlated with further local in-brain progression when defining a significance level of p = 0.05 but not after Šidák or Bonferroni significance level correction for multiple testing: However, definite local tumor control could finally be achieved in 91.9% after adjuvant therapy. Overall survival after recurrent metastasectomy was significantly higher as predicted by diagnosis-specific graded prognostic assessment (12.9 ± 2.3 vs. 8.4 ± 0.7 months; p < 0.0001). However, our series involved a limited number of heterogeneous patients. A larger, prospective, and controlled study is required. Considering the adequate local tumor control achieved in the vast majority of patients, surgery of recurrent metastases may represent one option in a multi-modal treatment approach of patients suffering from locally recurrent cerebral metastases.
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.