Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29429125›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2018

CyberKnife robotic radiosurgery in the multimodal management of acromegaly patients with invasive macroadenoma: a single center's experience.

Elisa Sala, Justin M Moore, Alvaro Amorin, Hector Martinez, Aprotim C Bhowmik, Layton Lamsam, Steven Chang, Scott G Soltys, Laurence Katznelson, Griffith R Harsh

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Multidisciplinary management of acromegaly: A consensus.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2020
    Review
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Elisa SalaUnit of Endocrinology, Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda - Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5474-9293
Justin M MooreDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Alvaro AmorinDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Hector MartinezDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Aprotim C BhowmikDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Layton LamsamDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Steven ChangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Scott G SoltysDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Laurence KatznelsonDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Griffith R HarshDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA. rharsh@stanford.edu.
Neurological Surgery · USStanford University · USStanford Medicine · USUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

NIH/NCRR REDCap grant support UL1 TR001085
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surgery is the primary treatment for acromegaly. However, surgery may not be curative of some tumors, particularly invasive macroadenomas. Adjuvant radiation, specifically robotic stereotactic radiosurgery (rSRS), may improve the endocrine outcome. We retrospectively reviewed hormonal and radiological data of 22 acromegalic patients with invasive macroadenomas treated with rSRS at Stanford University Medical Center between 2000 and 2016. Prior to treatment, the tumor's median maximal diameter was 19 mm (2.5-50 mm). Cavernous sinus invasion occurred in 19 patients (86.3%) and compression of the optic chiasm in 2 (9.0%). At last follow up, with an average follow up of 43.2 months, all patients had a reduction in their IGF-1 levels (median IGF-1% upper limit of normal (ULN) baseline: 136% vs last follow up: 97%; p = 0.05); 9 patients (40.9%) were cured, and 4 (18.1%) others demonstrated biochemical control of acromegaly. The median time to cure was 50 months and the mean interval to cure or biochemical control was 30.3 months (± 24 months, range 6-84 months). Hypopituitarism was present in 8 patients (36.3%) and new pituitary deficits occurred in 6 patients with a median latency of 31.6 ± 14.5 months. At final radiologic follow-up, 3 tumors (13.6%) were smaller and 19 were stable in size. The mean biologically effective dose (BED) was higher in subjects cured compared to those with persistent disease, 163 Gy3 (± 47) versus 111 Gy3 (± 43), respectively (p = 0.01). No patient suffered visual deterioration. Robotic SRS is a safe and effective treatment for acromegaly: radiation-induced visual complications and hypopituitarism is rare.

Indexed as

RadiosurgeryRobotic Surgical ProceduresAcromegalyAdenomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDisease ManagementFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPituitary NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAcromegalyCyberKnifeHypopituitarismPituitaryRobotic stereotactic radiosurgery

Identifiers

PMID29429125
OpenAlexW2785961243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.