Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35252015›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022

5-Aminolevulinic Acid False-Positive Rates in Newly Diagnosed and Recurrent Glioblastoma: Do Pseudoprogression and Radionecrosis Play a Role? A Meta-Analysis.

Luca Ricciardi, Carmelo Lucio Sturiale, Alba Scerrati, Vito Stifano, Teresa Somma, Tamara Ius, Sokol Trungu, Michele Acqui, Antonino Raco, Massimo Miscusi and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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 at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Luca RicciardiDivision of Neurosurgery, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Department of Neuroscience, Mental Health and Sense Organs (NESMOS), Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Carmelo Lucio SturialeInstitute of Neurosurgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, Rome, Italy.
Alba ScerratiNeurosurgery Department, S. Anna University Hospital, Ferrara, Italy.
Vito StifanoInstitute of Neurosurgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, Rome, Italy.
Teresa SommaDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Neurosciences and Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, Federico II University, Naples, Italy.
Tamara IusDivision of Neurosurgery, Neuroscience Department, University Hospital of Udine, Udine, Italy.
Sokol TrunguDivision of Neurosurgery, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Department of Neuroscience, Mental Health and Sense Organs (NESMOS), Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Michele AcquiDivision of Neurosurgery, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Department of Neuroscience, Mental Health and Sense Organs (NESMOS), Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Antonino RacoDivision of Neurosurgery, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Department of Neuroscience, Mental Health and Sense Organs (NESMOS), Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Massimo MiscusiDivision of Neurosurgery, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Department of Neuroscience, Mental Health and Sense Organs (NESMOS), Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe Maria Della PepaInstitute of Neurosurgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, Rome, Italy.
Azienda Ospedaliera Sant'Andrea · ITAgostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITSapienza University of Rome · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · ITUniversity of Ferrara · ITUniversity of Udine · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral studies have confirmed the impact of 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) on the extent of resection in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM). However, there are controversies on the 5-ALA fluorescence status in recurrent GBM surgery, with specific reference to pseudoprogression or radionecrosis; therefore, the safety and accuracy of surgical planning in 5-ALA-assisted procedures in the recurrent context are still unclear. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis is a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies on the use of 5-ALA in newly diagnosed and recurrent GBM, consistently conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Data on fluorescence status and correlation between fluorescence and histological findings were collected. We performed a meta-analysis of proportions to estimate the pooled rates of each outcome.

resultsThree online medical databases (PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library) were screened, 448 articles were evaluated, and 3 papers were finally included for data analysis. Fluorescence rate was not different between newly diagnosed and recurrent GBM [p = 0.45; odds ratio (OR): 1.23; 95% CI: 0.72-2.09; I DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsTherefore, a robust awareness of 5-ALA potentialities and pitfalls in recurrent GBM surgery should be considered for a cognizant surgical strategy. Further clinical trials could confirm the results of the present meta-analysis.

Indexed as

5-ALA fluorescenceglioblastomahigh-grade glioma (HGG)pseudoprogressionradionecrosisrecurrent glioblastoma

Identifiers

PMID35252015
PMCPMC8891510
OpenAlexW4212950262

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.