Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37253096›Full record

ArticleNeuro-oncology2023

Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group.

Philipp Karschnia, Antonio Dono, Jacob S Young, Stephanie T Juenger, Nico Teske, Levin Häni, Tommaso Sciortino, Christine Y Mau, Francesco Bruno, Luis Nunez and 17 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuro-oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
24.2field-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, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Predicting glioblastoma progression using MR diffusion tensor imaging: A systematic review.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging
    Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Contemporary surgical strategies for resection of intracranial gliomas.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Metabolic Imaging and Molecular Signatures Reveal Metabolic Phenotypes in Recurrent Glioblastoma.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  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

27 authors at 11 institutions in 5 countries.

Philipp KarschniaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1254-5310
Antonio DonoDepartment of Neurosurgery, McGovern Medical School at UT Health Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8041-8399
Jacob S YoungDepartment of Neurosurgery and Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Stephanie T JuengerDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Nico TeskeDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Levin HäniDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Tommaso SciortinoDivision of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Christine Y MauDepartment of Neuro-Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.
Francesco BrunoDivision of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neuroscience, University of Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8087-5293
Luis NunezDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging, McGovern Medical School at UT Health Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
Ramin A MorshedDepartment of Neurosurgery and Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Alexander F HaddadDepartment of Neurosurgery and Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Michael WellerDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1748-174X
Martin van den BentDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Juergen BeckDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Shawn Hervey-JumperDepartment of Neurosurgery and Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Annette M MolinaroDepartment of Neurosurgery and Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9854-7404
Nitin TandonDepartment of Neurosurgery, McGovern Medical School at UT Health Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2752-2365
Roberta RudàDivision of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neuroscience, University of Turin, Italy.
Michael A VogelbaumDepartment of Neuro-Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.
Lorenzo BelloDivision of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Oliver SchnellDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Stefan J GrauDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Susan M ChangDepartment of Neurosurgery and Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Mitchel S BergerDepartment of Neurosurgery and Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1983-4892
Yoshua EsquenaziDepartment of Neurosurgery, McGovern Medical School at UT Health Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9757-1453
Joerg-Christian TonnDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
University of San Francisco · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USUniversity of Freiburg · DEGerman Cancer Research Center · DEMoffitt Cancer Center · USUniversity of Cologne · DEUniversity of Milan · ITUniversity of Turin · ITErasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

Training Program in Translational Brain Tumor ResearchT32CA151022 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Joseph F Costello · 2010 to 2026
$6.6M
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA151022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe value of re-resection in recurrent glioblastoma remains controversial as a randomized trial that specifies intentional incomplete resection cannot be justified ethically. Here, we aimed to (1) explore the prognostic role of extent of re-resection using the previously proposed Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) classification (based upon residual contrast-enhancing (CE) and non-CE tumor), and to (2) define factors consolidating the surgical effects on outcome.

methodsThe RANO resect group retrospectively compiled an 8-center cohort of patients with first recurrence from previously resected glioblastomas. The associations of re-resection and other clinical factors with outcome were analyzed. Propensity score-matched analyses were constructed to minimize confounding effects when comparing the different RANO classes.

resultsWe studied 681 patients with first recurrence of Isocitrate Dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type glioblastomas, including 310 patients who underwent re-resection. Re-resection was associated with prolonged survival even when stratifying for molecular and clinical confounders on multivariate analysis; ≤1 cm3 residual CE tumor was associated with longer survival than non-surgical management. Accordingly, "maximal resection" (class 2) had superior survival compared to "submaximal resection" (class 3). Administration of (radio-)chemotherapy in the absence of postoperative deficits augmented the survival associations of smaller residual CE tumors. Conversely, "supramaximal resection" of non-CE tumor (class 1) was not associated with prolonged survival but was frequently accompanied by postoperative deficits. The prognostic role of residual CE tumor was confirmed in propensity score analyses.

conclusionsThe RANO resect classification serves to stratify patients with re-resection of glioblastoma. Complete resection according to RANO resect classes 1 and 2 is prognostic.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaHumansPrognosisRetrospective Studiesclassificationextent of resectionglioblastoma recurrenceoutcomesurgical re-resection

Identifiers

PMID37253096
PMCPMC10479742
OpenAlexW4378782554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.