ReviewHistology and histopathology2024
Atypical meningioma: Histopathological, genetic, and epigenetic features to predict recurrence risk.
Review in Histology and histopathology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Refining prognostic stratification of atypical meningiomas: significance of chromosome 1p deletion and brain invasion.Acta neuropathologica communications · 2025Article
- New imaging findings of tumor invasion into brain tissue: "Peritumoral Hyperintense Enhancement Sign".Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- The Impact of Molecular and Genetic Analysis on the Treatment of Patients with Atypical Meningiomas.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Grading assessed according to World Health Organization (WHO) criteria is a major prognostic factor for determining the risk of recurrence in patients with meningiomas and establishing the most appropriate therapeutic strategy after surgery. However, the main issue is to predict the recurrence risk of WHO grade 2 meningioma and, more specifically, of the atypical subtype. Indeed, owing to a reported recurrence rate of 50%, either radiotherapy or observation is currently considered an option after gross total surgical resection of atypical meningiomas. These heterogeneous clinical outcomes are likely related to the broad histopathological diagnostic criteria for this subtype, and whether meningiomas only present as brain invasion should be classified as atypical remains controversial. Over the last few years, several studies have shown that DNA methylation profiling, next-generation sequencing, and transcriptomics can better stratify meningiomas for their recurrence risk than histology. The main limitations to the widespread use of these approaches to classify meningiomas are their high cost and the need for sophisticated technologies. However, all studies concurred that atypical meningiomas without chromosome 1p deletion display a low recurrence risk, suggesting that the assessment of this cytogenetic alteration could represent an easy and quick method to determine which patients could benefit from adjuvant treatment after surgery. In addition, prognostically unfavorable molecular groups can be distinguished using specific immunostainings, although further validation is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.