Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35062885›Full record

ArticleBMC neurology2022

Age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index in recurrent glioblastoma: a new prognostic factor?

Melanie Barz, Stefanie Bette, Insa Janssen, A Kaywan Aftahy, Thomas Huber, Friederike Liesche-Starnecker, Yu-Mi Ryang, Benedikt Wiestler, Stephanie E Combs, Bernhard Meyer and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Von Hippel-Lindau/Hypoxia Inducible Factor Axis in Glioblastoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

11 authors.

Melanie BarzDepartment of Neurosurgery, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany. melanie.barz@tum.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8734-9309
Stefanie BetteDepartment of Neuroradiology, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.
Insa JanssenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.
A Kaywan AftahyDepartment of Neurosurgery, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.
Thomas HuberInstitute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Friederike Liesche-StarneckerDepartment of Neuropathology, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Institute of Pathology, Munich, Germany.
Yu-Mi RyangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.
Benedikt WiestlerDepartment of Neuroradiology, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.
Stephanie E CombsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.
Bernhard MeyerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.
Jens GemptDepartment of Neurosurgery, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor recurrent glioblastoma (GB) patients, several therapy options have been established over the last years such as more aggressive surgery, re-irradiation or chemotherapy. Age and the Karnofsky Performance Status Scale (KPSS) are used to make decisions for these patients as these are established as prognostic factors in the initial diagnosis of GB. This study's aim was to evaluate preoperative patient comorbidities by using the age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (ACCI) as a prognostic factor for recurrent GB patients.

methodsIn this retrospective analysis we could include 123 patients with surgery for primary recurrence of GB from January 2007 until December 2016 (43 females, 80 males, mean age 57 years (range 21-80 years)). Preoperative age, sex, ACCI, KPSS and adjuvant treatment regimes were recorded for each patient. Extent of resection (EOR) was recorded as a complete/incomplete resection of the contrast-enhancing tumor part.

resultsMedian overall survival (OS) was 9.0 months (95% CI 7.1-10.9 months) after first re-resection. Preoperative KPSS > 80% (P < 0.001) and EOR (P = 0.013) were associated with significantly improved survival in univariate analysis. Including these factors in multivariate analysis, preoperative KPSS < 80 (HR 2.002 [95% CI: 1.246-3.216], P = 0.004) and EOR are the only significant prognostic factor (HR 1.611 [95% CI: 1.036-2.505], P = 0.034). ACCI was not shown as a prognostic factor in univariate and multivariate analyses.

conclusionFor patients with surgery for recurrent glioblastoma, the ACCI does not add further information about patient's prognosis besides the well-established KPSS and extent of resection.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overComorbidityFemaleHumansKarnofsky Performance StatusMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultAge-adjusted Charlson comorbidity indexPrognostic factorRecurrent glioblastomaSurgery

Identifiers

PMID35062885
PMCPMC8780246

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.