Observational studyJournal of neuro-oncology2018
Is a pretreatment radiological staging system feasible for suggesting the optimal extent of resection and predicting prognosis in glioblastoma? An observational study.
Observational study in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2018. 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.
- Prognostic value of test(s) for O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation for predicting overall survival in people with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Review
- Virtual Monochromatic Image Quality from Dual-Layer Dual-Energy Computed Tomography for Detecting Brain Tumors.Korean journal of radiology · 2021Article
- Development of a prognostic index based on immunogenomic landscape analysis in glioma.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2021Article
- Germline ALK variations are associated with a poor prognosis in glioma and IDH-wildtype glioblastoma.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To assess the value of resection in glioblastoma based on pre-surgical tumor characteristics and a subsequent staging system. The lack of a staging system for glioblastoma hinders the analysis of treatment outcome. We classified 292 uniformly treated glioblastoma patients as stage I, II, or III based on tumor size, location, and eloquence and then analyzed the impact of the extent of resection. We classified 62% of patients as stage I, 25.3% as stage II, and 12.7% as stage III. Gross total resection (GTR) was performed mainly in stage I rather than stage II or III patients (79.2% vs. 14.6% vs. 6.3%; P < 0.001). Overall survival (OS) was 17.7, 14.6, and 10.8 months for stage I, II, and III patients, respectively (P = 0.005). Longer OS was significantly associated with greater extent of resection, younger age, KPS ≥ 70%, MGMT methylation, lower stage, and tumor ≤ 5 cm. In the subgroups of stage I (P = 0.04) and stage II (P < 0.001)-but not stage III-patients, GTR and partial resection (PR) were associated with longer OS. We constructed several multivariable models including different variables, and greater extent of resection, smaller tumor size, and MGMT methylation consistently emerged as independent markers of longer OS. This staging system provides a feasible tool for comparison of results. We confirmed the value of partial resection in stage I and II patients, in contrast to some reports suggesting that biopsy only is sufficient when gross total resection cannot be safely achieved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29285591What 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.