ReviewOcular oncology and pathology2021
Intravenous Chemotherapy for Retinoblastoma in the Era of Intravitreal Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review.
Review in Ocular oncology and pathology, 2021. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quercetin Enhances Topotecan Cytotoxicity in Retinoblastoma Cells Through ROS-Associated Stress and Apoptotic Signaling.Biomolecules · 2026Article
- Primary Subretinal Seeding in Retinoblastoma: Clinical Presentation and Treatment Outcomes.Ocular oncology and pathology · 2023Article
- Spotlight on Targeted Chemotherapy in Retinoblastoma: Safety, Efficacy, and Patient Outcomes.OncoTargets and therapy · 2022Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe published data on ocular survival following intravenous chemotherapy of retinoblastoma (RB) seems to be skewed by evolving practice patterns induced by use of intravitreal chemotherapy (iVitc). We aimed to explore potential role of iVitc for vitreous seeding for patients treated with intravenous chemotherapy (IVC).
methodsA literature search was performed to identify cases of RB treated with primary IVC prior to advent of iVitc by various search engines (PubMed, Medline, and Google) from 1992 to 2018. Studies were excluded if number of cases were less than 40 or lacked data related to type of recurrence and its treatment. Rates and patterns of recurrence and its management were categorized.
resultsOut of 15 studies identified, only 10 studies (797 eyes) met the inclusion criteria. The mean age at presentation was 15.3 months (range 0-192.8 months). Unilateral cases represented 25% of the cohort. The ocular survival rate with primary IVC was 63% (500/797 eyes). Of the 297 eyes (37%) that failed IVC therapy, additional 99 eyes could be salvaged with EBRT (599/797 eyes, 75%). Remaining 198 eyes were enucleated (198/797 eyes 25%). K-M survival analysis could not be done due lack of sufficient data. Recurrences that occurred (mean 12.2 months) after completion of primary IVC included relapse of retinal tumor (143 eyes [48%]), vitreous seeding (73 eyes [25%]), subretinal seeding (49 eyes [16%]), or any combination (103 eyes [35%]). Out of 73 eyes with vitreous seeding, additional 66 eyes (90%) would have been salvaged with iVitc, potentially improving ocular survival rates to 71% (500 + 66/797).
conclusionsEvolving practice patterns of RB treatment have unfavorably skewed published ocular survival rates following IVC. With incorporation of iVitc, the ocular survival rates with IVC can be potentially improved to be non-inferior to those achieved with intra-arterial chemotherapy.
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.