SynthesisJournal of neuro-oncology2024
Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy in craniopharyngiomas: A systematic review and single arm meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Stereotactic radiosurgery for craniopharyngioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Modern treatment of craniopharyngioma to improve outcomes: evidence of a change of paradigm.Endocrine · 2025Pooled it
- Radiation therapy for childhood-onset craniopharyngioma: systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Pharmacological Treatment for Adamantinomatous Craniopharyngioma.Current oncology reports · 2025Review
- Resection of craniopharyngiomas: comparison between gross total resection and subtotal resection with adjuvant radiation.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2025Review
- A case-based review of adult-onset craniopharyngioma.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNumerous studies have demonstrated Fractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy's (FSRT) effectiveness in tumor control post-resection for craniopharyngiomas. Nevertheless, past literature has presented conflicting findings particularly regarding endocrine and visual function outcomes. This study aims to elucidate FSRT's efficacy and safety for this population.
methodsAdhering to PRISMA, a systematic review and meta-analyses was conducted. Included studies had to report the effects of FSRT for treating craniopharyngiomas in a sample greater than four patients, addressing at least one of the outcomes of interest: improvement in visual acuity or field, new-onset hypopituitarism, effectiveness, and tumor progression. Relative risk with 95% confidence intervals were used to assess the outcomes.
resultsAfter retrieving a total of 1292 studies, 10 articles met the predefined criteria and thus were finally selected, amounting to a total of 256 patients. The improvement in visual acuity was estimated at 45% (95% CI: 6-83%), while the improvement in the visual field was 22% (95% CI: 0-51%). Regarding endocrine function, the new-onset hypopituitarism rate was found to be 5% (95% CI: 0-11%). Relative to FSRT effectiveness, the pooled estimate of the complete tumor response rate was 17% (95% CI: 4-30%), and the tumor progression rate was 7% (95% CI: 1-13%). Also, a 3-year progression-free survival rate of 98% (95% CI: 95-100%) was obtained.
conclusionDespite limitations and risks, FSRT shows promise as a viable therapeutic option for craniopharyngiomas, offering notable benefits for visual functions and tumor control. Further research is required to better understand the associated risks, benefits, and clinical utility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38457091What 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.