Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36428772›Full record

ReviewCancers2022

Methylation Profiling in Diffuse Gliomas: Diagnostic Value and Considerations.

Anna Wenger, Helena Carén

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Long-read sequencing for brain tumors.Frontiers in oncology · 2024
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Anna WengerSahlgrenska Center for Cancer Research, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, 413 90 Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-6063-5401
Helena CarénSahlgrenska Center for Cancer Research, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, 413 90 Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-8584-555X
University of Gothenburg · SEWellcome Sanger Institute · GB

Funding

Barncancerfonden PR2019-0058Swedish Cancer Society 19 0356 Pj 01 H
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diffuse gliomas cause significant morbidity across all age groups, despite decades of intensive research efforts. Here, we review the differences in diffuse gliomas in adults and children, as well as the World Health Organisation (WHO) 2021 classification of these tumours. We explain how DNA methylation-based classification works and list the methylation-based tumour types and subclasses for adult and paediatric diffuse gliomas. The benefits and utility of methylation-based classification in diffuse gliomas demonstrated to date are described. This entails the identification of novel tumour types/subclasses, patient stratification and targeted treatment/clinical management, and alterations in the clinical diagnosis in favour of the methylation-based over the histopathological diagnosis. Finally, we address several considerations regarding the use of DNA methylation profiling as a diagnostic tool, e.g., the threshold of the classifier, the calibrated score, tumour cell content and intratumour heterogeneity.

Indexed as

calibrated scoreclassificationdiffuse gliomasglioblastomaheterogeneityintratumourmethylationMGMT

Identifiers

PMID36428772
PMCPMC9688075
OpenAlexW4309449454

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.