Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30673344›Full record

ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2019

Comparing Glioblastoma Surgery Decisions Between Teams Using Brain Maps of Tumor Locations, Biopsies, and Resections.

Domenique M J Müller, Pierre A J T Robe, Roelant S Eijgelaar, Marnix G Witte, Martin Visser, Jan C de Munck, Marieke L D Broekman, Tatjana Seute, Jeroen Hendrikse, David P Noske and 6 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

16 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Domenique M J MüllerVrije Universiteit Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Pierre A J T RobeUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Roelant S EijgelaarNetherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Marnix G WitteNetherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Martin VisserUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jan C de MunckUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Marieke L D BroekmanUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Tatjana SeuteUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jeroen HendrikseUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
David P NoskeVrije Universiteit Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
William P VandertopVrije Universiteit Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Frederik BarkhofUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Mathilde C M KouwenhovenVrije Universiteit Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Emmanuel MandonnetHôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France.
Mitchel S BergerUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Philip C De Witt HamerVrije Universiteit Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
University Medical Center Utrecht · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLHôpital Lariboisière · FRUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of glioblastoma surgery is to maximize the extent of resection while preserving functional integrity, which depends on the location within the brain. A standard to compare these decisions is lacking. We present a volumetric voxel-wise method for direct comparison between two multidisciplinary teams of glioblastoma surgery decisions throughout the brain.

methodsAdults undergoing first-time glioblastoma surgery from 2012 to 2013 performed by two neuro-oncologic teams were included. Patients had had a diagnostic biopsy or resection. Preoperative tumors and postoperative residues were segmented on magnetic resonance imaging in three dimensions and registered to standard brain space. Voxel-wise probability maps of tumor location, biopsy, and resection were constructed for each team to compare patient referral bias, indication variation, and treatment variation. To evaluate the quality of care, subgroups of differentially resected brain regions were analyzed for survival and functional outcome.

resultsOne team included 101 patients, and the other included 174; 91 tumors were biopsied, and 181 were resected. Patient characteristics were largely comparable between teams. Distributions of tumor locations were dissimilar, suggesting referral bias. Distributions of biopsies were similar, suggesting absence of indication variation. Differentially resected regions were identified in the anterior limb of the right internal capsule and the right caudate nucleus, indicating treatment variation. Patients with (n = 12) and without (n = 6) surgical removal in these regions had similar overall survival and similar permanent neurologic deficits.

conclusionProbability maps of tumor location, biopsy, and resection provide additional information that can inform surgical decision making across multidisciplinary teams for patients with glioblastoma.

Indexed as

NeuroimagingPatient Care TeamAgedBiopsyBrain NeoplasmsClinical Decision-MakingFemaleGlioblastomaHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeurosurgical Procedures

Identifiers

PMID30673344
PMCPMC6873995
OpenAlexW2911758619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.