ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2023
Incidence, management, and outcome of incidental meningioma: what has happened in 10 years?
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep learning-driven brain tumor classification and segmentation using non-contrast MRI.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A retrospective comparison of active surveillance to stereotactic radiosurgery for the management of elderly patients with an incidental meningioma.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- Incidental meningiomas: a current and increasingly common challenge.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to study the use of brain scanning, and the subsequent findings of presumed incidental meningioma in two time periods, and to study differences in follow-up, treatment, and outcome.
methodsRecords of all performed CT and MRI of the brain during two time periods were retrospectively reviewed in search of patients with presumed incidental meningioma. These patients were further analyzed using medical health records, with the purpose to study clinical handling and outcome during a 3 year follow up.
resultsAn identical number of unique patients underwent brain imaging during the two time periods (n = 22 259 vs. 22 013). In 2018-2019, 25% more incidental meningiomas were diagnosed compared to 2008-2009 (n = 161 vs. 129, p = 0.052). MRI was used more often in 2018-2019 (26.1 vs. 12.4%, p = 0.004), and the use of contrast enhancement, irrespective of modality, also increased (26.8 vs. 12.2%, p < 0.001). In the most recent cohort, patients were older (median 79 years vs. 73 years, p = 0.03). Indications showed a significant increase of cancer without known metastases among scanned patients. 29.5 and 35.4% of patients in the cohorts were deceased 3 years after diagnosis for causes unrelated to their meningioma.
conclusionsDespite the same number of unique patients undergoing brain scans in the time periods, there was a trend towards more patients diagnosed with an incidental asymptomatic meningioma in the more recent years. This difference may be attributed to more contrast enhanced scans and more scans among the elderly but needs to be further studied. Patients in the cohort from 2018 to 2019 more often had non-metastatic cancer, with their cause of scan screening for metastases. There was no significant difference in management decision at diagnosis, but within 3 years of follow up significantly more patients in the latter cohort had been re-scanned. Almost a third of all patients were deceased within 3 years after diagnosis, due to causes other than their meningioma.
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.