ArticleNeuro-oncology practice2020
Considerations for a surgical RCT for diffuse low-grade glioma: a survey.
Article in Neuro-oncology practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical considerations in randomization for neurosurgical oncology trials: A scoping review.Neuro-oncology practice · 2026Review
- Management of Diffuse Low-Grade Glioma: The Renaissance of Robust Evidence.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Neurosurgeons' perspective on surgical treatment of glioblastoma: Practices, beliefs and willingness to randomize in surgical trials.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiffuse low-grade gliomas (DLGGs) are heterogeneous tumors that inevitably differentiate into malignant entities, leading to disability and death. Recently, a shift toward up-front maximal safe resection of DLGGs has been favored. However, this transition is not supported by randomized controlled trial (RCT) data. Here, we sought to survey the neuro-oncology community on considerations for a surgical RCT for DLGGs.
methodsA 21-question survey focusing on a surgical RCT for DLGGs was developed and validated by 2 neurosurgeons. A sample case of a patient for whom management might be debatable was presented to gather additional insight. The survey was disseminated to members of the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) and responses were collected from March 16 to July 10, 2018.
resultsA total of 131 responses were collected. Sixty-three of 117 (54%) respondents thought an RCT would not be ethical, 39 of 117 (33%) would consider participating, and 56 of 117 (48%) believed an RCT would be valuable for determining the differing roles of biopsy, surgery, and observation. This was exemplified by an evenly distributed selection of the latter management options for our sample case. Eighty-three of 120 (69.2%) respondents did not believe in equipoise for DLGG patients. Quality of life and overall survival were deemed equally important end points for a putative RCT.
conclusionsBased on our survey, it is evident that management of certain DLGG patients is not well defined and an RCT may be justified. As with any surgical RCT, logistic challenges are anticipated. Robust patient-relevant end points and standardization of perioperative adjuncts are necessary if a surgical RCT is undertaken.
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.