Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33215340›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neuro-oncology2020

The role of imaging for the management of newly diagnosed glioblastoma in adults: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline update.

Paige Lundy, Joseph Domino, Timothy Ryken, Sarah Fouke, David J McCracken, D Ryan Ormond, Jeffrey J Olson

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. A comparison study of dynamic [Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Synchronous glioblastoma and brain metastases: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2022
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Paige LundyDepartment of Neurosurgery, School of Medicine, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA. plundy@kumc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8381-8259
Joseph DominoDepartment of Neurosurgery, School of Medicine, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Timothy RykenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA.
Sarah FoukeBrain and Spine Center, St. Luke's Hospital, St. Louis, MO, USA.
David J McCrackenPiedmont Brain Tumor Center, Atlanta, GA, USA.
D Ryan OrmondDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Jeffrey J OlsonDepartment of Neurosurgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
University of Kansas · USDartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center · USEmory University · USPiedmont Cancer Institute · USSt. Luke's Hospital · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

target populationThese recommendations apply to adults with a newly diagnosed lesion with a suspected or histopathologically proven glioblastoma (GBM). QUESTION: What are the optimal imaging techniques to be used in the management of a suspected glioblastoma (GBM), specifically: which imaging sequences are critical for most accurately identifying or diagnosing a GBM and distinguishing this tumor from other tumor types? RECOMMENDATIONS: Critical Imaging for the Identification and Diagnosis of Glioblastoma Level II: In patients with a suspected GBM, it is recommended that the minimum magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) exam should be an anatomic exam with both T2 weighted, FLAIR and pre- and post-gadolinium contrast enhanced T1 weighted imaging. The addition of diffusion and perfusion weighted MR imaging can assist in the assessment of suspected GBM for the purposes of distinguishing GBM from other tumor types. Computed tomography (CT) can provide additional information regarding calcification or hemorrhage and also can be useful for subjects who are unable to undergo MR imaging. At a minimum, these anatomic sequences can help identify a lesion as well as its location, and potential for surgical intervention. Improvement of diagnostic specificity with the addition of non-anatomic (physiologic imaging) to anatomic imaging Level II: One blinded prospective study and a significant number of case series support the addition of diffusion and perfusion weighted MR imaging in the assessment of suspected GBM, for the purposes of distinguishing GBM from other tumor types (e.g., primary CNS lymphoma or metastases). Level III: It is suggested that magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) and nuclear medicine imaging (PET 18F-FDG and 11C-MET) be used to provide additional support for the diagnosis of GBM.

Indexed as

AdultDisease ManagementEvidence-Based PracticeGlioblastomaHumansMultimodal ImagingPractice Guidelines as TopicDiagnostic specificityDiffusion weighted imagingGlioblastomaGuidelinesMagnetic resonance imagingPerfusion weighted imagingPET imagingPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID33215340
OpenAlexW3102576207

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.