Observational studyMedicine2018
Outcome predictors in the management of intramedullary classic ependymoma: An integrative survival analysis.
Observational study in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Do We Need Radiotherapy in Grade II Ependymoma?Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Complete Versus Incomplete Surgical Resection in Intramedullary Ependymomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Global spine journal · 2021Article
- Downregulated long non-coding RNA LINC00899 inhibits invasion and migration of spinal ependymoma cells via RBL2-dependent FoxO pathway.Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) · 2019Article
- Molecular foundations of primary spinal tumors-implications for surgical management.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This is a retrospective study.The aim of this study was to illustrate the survival outcomes of patients with classic ependymoma (CE) and identify potential prognostic factors.CE is the most common category of spinal ependymomas, but few published studies have discussed predictors of the survival outcome.A Boolean search of the PubMed, Embase, and OVID databases was conducted by 2 investigators independently. The objects were intramedullary grade II ependymoma according to 2007 WHO classification. Univariate Kaplan-Meier analysis and Log-Rank tests were performed to identify variables associated with progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS). Multivariate Cox regression was performed to assess hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Statistical analysis was performed by SPSS version 23.0 (IBM Corp.) with statistical significance defined as P < .05.A total of 35 studies were identified, including 169 cases of CE. The mean follow-up time across cases was 64.2 ± 51.5 months. Univariate analysis showed that patients who had undergone total resection (TR) had better PFS and OS than those with subtotal resection (STR) and biopsy (P = .002, P = .004, respectively). Within either univariate or multivariate analysis (P = .000, P = .07, respectively), histological type was an independent prognostic factor for PFS of CE [papillary type: HR 0.002, 95% CI (0.000-0.073), P = .001, tanycytic type: HR 0.010, 95% CI (0.000-0.218), P = .003].It was the first integrative analysis of CE to elucidate the correlation between kinds of factors and prognostic outcomes. Definite histological type and safely TR were foundation of CE's management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
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.