Correction to: Super selective intra‑arterial cerebral infusion of modern chemotherapeutics after blood-brain barrier disruption: where are we now, and where we are going.

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.

1. Safety and feasibility of intra-arterial delivery of teniposide to high grade gliomas after blood-brain barrier disruption: a case series.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2024
   Article
2. Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption for the Treatment of Primary Brain Tumors: Advances in the Past Half-Decade.Current oncology reports · 2024
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Erratum for
  Super selective intra-arterial cerebral infusion of modern chemotherapeutics after blood-brain barrier disruption: where are we now, and where we are going.2020

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract