ReviewSarcoma2020
Prognostic Factors for Development of Subsequent Metastases in Localized Osteosarcoma: A Systematic Review and Identification of Literature Gaps.
Review in Sarcoma, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Malignant Bone and Soft Tissue Lesions of the Foot.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- How to confront the high prevalence of pulmonary micro nodules (PMNs) in osteosarcoma patients?International orthopaedics · 2022Article
- Machine learning-based CT radiomics features for the prediction of pulmonary metastasis in osteosarcoma.The British journal of radiology · 2021Article
- Zinc oxide nanoparticles fromSaudi journal of biological sciences · 2021Article
- Role of MicroRNAs in Human Osteosarcoma: Future Perspectives.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- LncRNA prostate androgen-regulated transcript 1 (PART 1) functions as an oncogene in osteosarcoma via sponging miR-20b-5p to upregulate BAMBI.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Targeting Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Treatment Efficacy and Resistance in Osteosarcoma: A Review of Current and Future Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo investigate prognostic factors in pediatric and young adult patients with localized osteosarcoma that could predict the development of subsequent pulmonary metastases and lead to an ability to risk-stratify therapy. We performed a systematic review of the literature published since January 1990 to establish common evidence-based prognostic factors.
methodsPubMed and Embase searches (Jan 1990-Aug 2018) were performed. Two reviewers independently selected papers for patients with localized osteosarcoma with subsequent metastatic development and then reviewed for quality of methods and prognostic factors.
resultsDatabase searches yielded 216 unique results. After screening, 27 full-text articles were studied in depth, with 9 items fulfilling predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Age, tumor location, tumor size/volume, and histologic response carried independent prognostic value in the majority of the studies.
conclusionsSeveral prognostic factors seemed to be consistent amongst the studies, but the heterogeneity and smaller sizes of the study populations made pooling of results difficult. Standardization of larger patient populations and consistent definitions/cutoffs for prognostic factors are needed to further assess for consistent prognostic factors and potential predictive models to be developed.
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.