ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Radiation necrosis after radiation therapy treatment of brain metastases: A computational approach.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Mechanistic Model of Brain Necrosis Progression Based on Vascular Heterogeneity.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2026Article
- The evolving landscape of brain metastasis: volume II.Trends in cancer · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in neuro-oncology: methodological bases, practical applications and ethical and regulatory issues.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Review
- A clinical decision-support framework to differentiate radiation necrosis from tumor progression in brain metastases.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metastasis is the process through which cancer cells break away from a primary tumor, travel through the blood or lymph system, and form new tumors in distant tissues. One of the preferred sites for metastatic dissemination is the brain, affecting more than 20% of all cancer patients. This figure is increasing steadily due to improvements in treatments of primary tumors. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is one of the main treatment options for patients with a small or moderate number of brain metastases (BMs). A frequent adverse event of SRS is radiation necrosis (RN), an inflammatory condition caused by late normal tissue cell death. A major diagnostic problem is that RNs are difficult to distinguish from BM recurrences, due to their similarities on standard magnetic resonance images (MRIs). However, this distinction is key to choosing the best therapeutic approach since RNs resolve often without further interventions, while relapsing BMs may require open brain surgery. Recent research has shown that RNs have a faster growth dynamics than recurrent BMs, providing a way to differentiate the two entities, but no mechanistic explanation has been provided for those observations. In this study, computational frameworks were developed based on mathematical models of increasing complexity, providing mechanistic explanations for the differential growth dynamics of BMs relapse versus RN events and explaining the observed clinical phenomenology. Simulated tumor relapses were found to have growth exponents substantially smaller than the group in which there was inflammation due to damage induced by SRS to normal brain tissue adjacent to the BMs, thus leading to RN. ROC curves with the synthetic data had an optimal threshold that maximized the sensitivity and specificity values for a growth exponent β* = 1.05, very close to that observed in patient datasets.
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.