ArticleCancer medicine2019
Prognostic factors among single primary gliosarcoma cases: A study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data from 1973-2013.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gliosarcoma: A Multi-Institutional Analysis on Clinical Outcomes and Prognostic Factors.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Conditional survival and changing risk profile in patients with gliosarcoma.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Prognostic Factors of Gliosarcoma in the Real World: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2023Article
- Computed Tomography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Pathological Features of Gliosarcoma.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2022Article
- Do gliosarcomas have distinct imaging features on routine MRI?The neuroradiology journal · 2021Article
- Predictors and survival of primary clear cell carcinoma of liver: a population-based study of an uncommon primary liver tumor.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
- Optic pathway gliosarcoma: A very rare location for a rare disease.Radiology case reports · 2021Article
- Epidemiologic Features, Survival, and Prognostic Factors Among Patients With Different Histologic Variants of Glioblastoma: Analysis of a Nationwide Database.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Widowed status predicts poor overall survival of Chinese patients with prostate cancer.Translational cancer research · 2020Article
- Prognostic factors among single primary gliosarcoma cases: A study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data from 1973-2013.Cancer medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrognostic factors for single primary gliosarcoma (PGS) remain unknown.
objectiveThe purpose of our study was to examine patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics as potential predictors of survival using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program data (1973-2013).
methodsThe patients of single PGS were selected based on the exclusion criteria from SEER. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze all the data.
resultsSingle PGS has an apparent popularity for the temporal lobe (35.2%, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.440, 95%CI = 0.251-0.770) and frontal lobe (20.9%, HR = 0.408, 95%CI = 0.231-0.720) which could achieve a better survival rate than cerebrum (P = .034). The mean age at diagnosis was 60.07 ± 14.161. The overall 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year survival was 55.40%, 29.58%, 10.01%, and 2.73%. Age at diagnosis was proved to be a significant predictor of overall survival (OS) (P < .001). There is no significant difference in race, marital status, or grade. Patients' tumor size which is located in 41-60 mm (P = .047, HR = 1.468, 95%CI = 1.004-2.147) and >60 mm (P= .003, HR = 1.899, 95%CI = 1.244-2.901) showed a higher risk of death. Surgery played a critical role in OS (P < .001). Radiation after surgery was another predictor of OS of PGS (P < .001). Among all the radiation methods, combination of beam with implants or isotopes (P = .000, HR = 0.491, 95%CI = 0.412-0.585) or radiation NOS (P = .027, HR = 0.362, 95%CI = 0.148-0.889) were more beneficial to patients.
conclusionThis study indicated that single PGS has a poor prognosis. Prognosis of single PGS would become poorer along with patients' age and tumor size (>40 mm). Surgery intervention and radiation therapy were beneficial factors.
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.