Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29623596›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neuro-oncology2018

Clinical challenges of glioma and pregnancy: a systematic review.

A van Westrhenen, J T Senders, E Martin, A C DiRisio, M L D Broekman

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Brain Stem Tumor in Early Gestation: Two Case Reports.Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Cancer in pregnancy: FIGO Best practice advice and narrative review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors.

A van WestrhenenDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1987-5793
J T SendersDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
E MartinDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
A C DiRisioDepartment of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Computational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Harvard Medical School, 60 Fenwood Road, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
M L D BroekmanDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. M.L.D.Broekman-4@umcutrecht.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis review aims to summarize challenges in clinical management of concomitant gliomas and pregnancy and provides suggestions for this management based on current literature.

methodsPubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched for studies on glioma and pregnancy. Observational studies and articles describing expert opinions on clinical management were included. The strength of evidence was categorized as arguments from observational studies, consensus in expert opinions, or single expert opinions. Risk of bias was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).

results27 studies were selected, including 316 patients with newly diagnosed (n = 202) and known (n = 114) gliomas during pregnancy. The median sample size was 6 (range 1-65, interquartile range 1-9). Few recommendations originated from observational studies; the remaining arguments originated from consensus in expert opinions.

conclusionFindings from observational studies of adequate quality include (1) There is no known effect of pregnancy on survival in low-grade glioma patients; (2) Pregnancy can provoke clinical deterioration and tumor growth on MRI; (3) In stable women at term, there is no benefit of cesarean section over vaginal delivery, with respect to adverse events in mother or child. Unanswered questions include when pregnancy should be discouraged, what best monitoring schedule is for both mother and fetus, and if and how chemo- and radiation therapy can be safely administered during pregnancy. A multicenter individual patient level meta-analysis collecting granular information on clinical management and related outcomes is needed to provide scientific evidence for clinical decision-making in pregnant glioma patients.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsFemaleGliomaHumansObservational Studies as TopicPregnancyPregnancy Complications, NeoplasticClinical managementGliomaGlioma patientPregnancyPregnant patient

Identifiers

PMID29623596
PMCPMC6061223

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.