ArticleNeuro-oncology advances
Radiological assessment schedule for 1p/19q-codeleted gliomas during the surveillance period using parametric modeling.
Article in Neuro-oncology advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- RANO 2.0: critical updates and practical considerations for radiological assessment in neuro-oncology.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere have been no evidence-based guidelines on the optimal schedule for the radiological assessment of 1p/19q-codeleted glioma. This study aimed to recommend an appropriate radiological evaluation schedule for 1p/19q-codeleted glioma during the surveillance period through parametric modeling of the progression-free survival (PFS) curve.
methodsA total of 234 patients with 1p/19q-codeleted glioma (137 grade II and 97 grade III) who completed regular treatment were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were stratified into each layered progression risk group by recursive partitioning analysis. A piecewise exponential model was used to standardize the PFS curves. The cutoff value of the progression rate among the remaining progression-free patients was set to 10% at each scan.
resultsProgression risk stratification resulted in 3 groups. The optimal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) interval for patients without a residual tumor was every 91.2 weeks until 720 weeks after the end of regular treatment following the latent period for 15 weeks. For patients with a residual tumor after the completion of adjuvant radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy, the optimal MRI interval was every 37.5 weeks until week 90 and every 132.8 weeks until week 361, while it was every 33.6 weeks until week 210 and every 14.4 weeks until week 495 for patients with a residual tumor after surgery only or surgery followed by radiotherapy only.
conclusionsThe optimal radiological follow-up schedule for each progression risk stratification of 1p/19q-codeleted glioma can be established from the parametric modeling of PFS.
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.