ArticleWorld neurosurgery: X2024
Prognostic factors to predict postoperative survival in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.
Article in World neurosurgery: X, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction of MGMT promoter methylation in glioblastoma and grade 4 astrocytoma using fluid-suppressed chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI and machine learning-based segmentation.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Biological tumor volume predicts survival in recurrent High-Grade glioma: A multiparametric [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Review
- A retrospective analysis of survival prognostic factors and risk stratification in recurrent glioblastoma.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Deep Neural Network-Based Risk Prediction of Glioblastoma Multiforme Recurrence.Journal of molecular neuroscience : MN · 2025Article
- Can Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (PLR) and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) Help Predict Outcomes of Patients With Recurrent Glioblastoma?In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There are no generally accepted criteria for selecting patients with recurrent glioblastoma for surgery. This retrospective study in a Danish population-based cohort aimed to identify prognostic factors affecting postoperative survival after repeated surgery for recurrent glioblastoma and to test if the preoperative New Scale for Recurrent Glioblastoma Surgery (NSGS) developed by Park CK et al could assist in the selection of patients for repeat glioblastoma surgery. Methods: Clinical data from 66 patients with recurrent glioblastoma and repeated surgery were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier plots were produced to illustrate survival in each of the three NSGS prognostic groups, and Cox proportional hazard regression was used to identify prognostic variables. Multivariable analysis was used to identify differences in survival in the three prognostic groups. Results: Six variables significantly affected postoperative survival: preoperative Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) < 70 ( Conclusion: Several prognostic variables to predict postoperative survival in patients with recurrent glioblastoma were identified and should be considered when selecting patient for repeat surgery. The NSGS scoring system was useful as there were significant differences in postoperative survival between its three prognostic groups.
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.