ArticlePloS one2018
Growth patterns of survivors of retinoblastoma treated with ophthalmic artery chemosurgery.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment of Retinoblastoma: What Is the Latest and What Is the Future.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- A temperature-sensitive phase-change hydrogel of topotecan achieves a long-term sustained antitumor effect on retinoblastoma cells.OncoTargets and therapy · 2019Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Although studies from pediatric cancers (largely acute lymphoblastic leukemia) have shown that patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy may experience decreased growth velocity during the treatment phase, no such data exist for retinoblastoma patients treated with systemic chemotherapy or ophthalmic artery chemosurgery (OAC). The purpose of this study is to report growth patterns of our retinoblastoma (Rb) population who were treated with OAC in a retrospective, single center (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center) review of 341 patients treated between 2006 and 2016. Children who only received OAC were classified as naive; those who were treated initially with systemic chemotherapy and subsequently presented to our center for OAC were termed secondary; and a small group of patients who received single-agent systemic chemotherapy prior to OAC were labeled bridge. For all patients, height and weight were recorded at monthly intervals during OAC (short-term) and then annually during a follow-up period (long-term) up to 3 years after treatment. Excluded from this study were children who received external radiation therapy and those with genetic syndromes, which are independently associated with growth derangements. During OAC, there was no significant difference in growth velocity between the naïve and secondary groups. In either group, number of treatments also did not affect growth rate. Three years after the end of OAC, naïve patients were in the 68th percentile by height (95% CI 61.30, 74.63) compared to secondary patients in the 61st percentile (95% CI 51.1, 71.47). Both groups were in the same weight percentiles during the first two years of follow-up but at the three-year follow-up period, naïve patients were in the 63rd percentile (95% CI 57.4, 69.4) and secondary patients were in the 60th percentile (95% CI 50.4, 69.7). OAC for retinoblastoma does not appear to impact short-term growth velocity, weight gain during the treatment period or after three years.
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.