GuidelineCancers2021
Current Indications of Secondary Enucleation in Retinoblastoma Management: A Position Paper on Behalf of the European Retinoblastoma Group (EURbG).
Guideline in Cancers, 2021. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nanoprobe-Enabled Precision Imaging and Panoramic Boundary Delineation in Retinoblastoma.Cancer innovation · 2026Review
- Spatial Proteomic Analysis Highlights Molecular Reprogramming in Optic Nerve Invasive Retinoblastoma.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Comparison of single- versus multi-drug treatment for intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) in children with retinoblastoma.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
- The use of aqueous humor cfDNA for low-pass whole genome sequencing as a clinical test to identify intraocular retinoblastoma recurrence.ScienceBank · 2025Article
- Retinoblastoma treatment in a Brazilian population. Presentation and long-term results.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Automatic retinoblastoma screening and surveillance using deep learning.British journal of cancer · 2023Article
- Special Issue ofCancers · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Secondary enucleation (SE) puts an irreversible end to eye-preserving therapies, whenever their prolongation is expected to violate the presumed state of metastatic grace. At present, it must be acknowledged that clear criteria for SE are missing, leading to empiric and subjective indications commonly related to disease progression or relapse, disease persistence masking the optic nerve head or treatment-related complications obscuring the fundus view. This absence of evidence-based consensus regarding SE is explained by the continuously moving frontiers of the conservative management as a result of diagnostic and therapeutic advances, as well as by the lack of studies sufficiently powered to accurately stratify the risk of metastasis in conservatively treated patients. In this position paper of the European Retinoblastoma Group (EURbG), we give an overview of the progressive shift in the indications for SE over the past decades and propose guidelines to assist decision-making with respect to when SE becomes imperative or recommended, with corresponding absolute and relative SE indications. Further studies and validation of biologic markers correlated with the risk of metastasis are expected to set more precisely the frontiers of conservative management and thus consensual criteria for SE in the future.
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.