Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31385973›Full record

ReviewNeuro-oncology practice2017

Pivotal therapeutic trials for infiltrating gliomas and how they affect clinical practice.

Rimas V Lukas, Maciej M Mrugala

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuro-oncology practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Clinical neuro-oncology for the neurologist.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2020
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rimas V LukasUniversity of Chicago, Department of Neurology (R.V.L.); University of Washington, Department of Neurology (M.M.M.).
Maciej M MrugalaUniversity of Chicago, Department of Neurology (R.V.L.); University of Washington, Department of Neurology (M.M.M.).
University of Chicago · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The therapeutic landscape of the management of low- and high-grade infiltrating gliomas continues to evolve. Daily clinical decision making in neuro-oncology clinics across the US is frequently challenging, especially for anaplastic and low grade primary brain tumors. The focus of this review is centered on treatments which are approved by the FDA and/or featured in the NCCN Guidelines. Systemic therapy trials using a variety of agents such as temozolomide, bevacizumab, and procarbazine, lomustine, vincristine (PCV), and lastly trials of local therapies including surgical trials using carmustine impregnated wafers as well as trials investigating the administration of tumor treating fields are evaluated. Pivotal trials on the treatment of the primary brain tumors are discussed in detail along with associated correlative studies.

Indexed as

bevacizumabgliomalomustinetemozolomidetumor treating fields

Identifiers

PMID31385973
PMCPMC6655416
OpenAlexW2509853221

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.