Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35307892›Full record

ReviewBrain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland)2022

Updates in the classification of ependymal neoplasms: The 2021 WHO Classification and beyond.

Catena Kresbach, Sina Neyazi, Ulrich Schüller

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
14.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Outcomes after surgical resection of spinal ependymomas: extent of resection, imaging phenotype, and survival.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Clinical, surgical, and molecular features of pediatric supratentorial ependymomas: a single-institution experience.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Catena KresbachDepartment of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Sina NeyaziDepartment of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Ulrich SchüllerDepartment of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8731-1121
Universität Hamburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ependymal neoplasms occur at all ages and encompass multiple tumor types and subtypes that develop in the supratentorial compartment, the posterior fossa, or the spinal cord. Clinically, ependymomas represent a very heterogeneous group of tumors from rather benign subependymomas to very aggressive and often deadly childhood ependymomas of the posterior fossa. Newly identified biological markers and classification schemes, e. g. based on global DNA methylation profiling, have led to the definition of 10 types of ependymal tumors and an improved prediction of patients' outcome by applying the new classification system. While the exact genetic basis for several ependymoma types still remains unclear, the knowledge about ependymoma driving events has significantly increased within the last decade and contributed to a classification based on molecular characteristics and localization rather than histological features alone. Convincing evidence is now pointing towards gene fusions involving ZFTA or YAP1 causing the development of supratentorial ependymomas. Also, H3, EZHIP, or TERT mutations have been detected in a fraction of infratentorial ependymal tumors. Finally, MYCN amplifications have recently been identified in spinal ependymomas, in addition to the previously known mutations in NF2. This review summarizes how recent findings regarding biology, molecular tumor typing, and clinical outcome have impacted the classification of ependymomas as suggested by the updated 2021 WHO CNS tumor classification system. We focus on changes compared to the previous classification of 2016 and discuss how a formal grading could evolve in the future and guide clinicians to treat ependymoma patients.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsEpendymomaInfratentorial NeoplasmsSupratentorial NeoplasmsChildHumansWorld Health OrganizationclassificationDNA methylationependymomagradinghistologymolecular pathology

Identifiers

PMID35307892
PMCPMC9245931
OpenAlexW4220890889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.