Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38684246›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

SUPRAMAX-study: supramaximal resection versus maximal resection for glioblastoma patients: study protocol for an international multicentre prospective cohort study (ENCRAM 2201).

Jasper Kees Wim Gerritsen, Jacob S Young, Susan M Chang, Sandro M Krieg, Christine Jungk, Martin J van den Bent, Djaina D Satoer, Sebastian Ille, Philippe Schucht, Brian V Nahed and 4 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Neuro-oncology advances
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Jasper Kees Wim GerritsenNeurosurgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands j.gerritsen@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-4619-865X
Jacob S YoungDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Susan M ChangDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Sandro M KriegDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
Christine JungkNeuro-oncology, UniversitatsKlinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Martin J van den BentDepartment of Neuro Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Djaina D SatoerNeurosurgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Sebastian IlleDepartment of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Bayern, Germany.
Philippe SchuchtNeurosurgery, Inselspital Universitätsspital Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Brian V NahedDepartment of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Marike Lianne Daphne BroekmanNeurosurgery, Medisch Centrum Haaglanden, Den Haag, The Netherlands.
Mitchel BergerUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Steven De VleeschouwerNeurosurgery, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Arnaud J P E VincentDepartment of Neurosurgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.

Funding

Training Program in Translational Brain Tumor ResearchT32CA151022 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Joseph F Costello · 2010 to 2026
$6.6M
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA151022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA greater extent of resection of the contrast-enhancing (CE) tumour part has been associated with improved outcomes in glioblastoma. Recent results suggest that resection of the non-contrast-enhancing (NCE) part might yield even better survival outcomes (supramaximal resection, SMR). Therefore, this study evaluates the efficacy and safety of SMR with and without mapping techniques in high-grade glioma (HGG) patients in terms of survival, functional, neurological, cognitive and quality of life outcomes. Furthermore, it evaluates which patients benefit the most from SMR, and how they could be identified preoperatively. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is an international, multicentre, prospective, two-arm cohort study of observational nature. Consecutive glioblastoma patients will be operated with SMR or maximal resection at a 1:1 ratio. Primary endpoints are (1) overall survival and (2) proportion of patients with National Institute of Health Stroke Scale deterioration at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. Secondary endpoints are (1) residual CE and NCE tumour volume on postoperative T1-contrast and FLAIR (Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery) MRI scans; (2) progression-free survival; (3) receipt of adjuvant therapy with chemotherapy and radiotherapy; and (4) quality of life at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. The total duration of the study is 5 years. Patient inclusion is 4 years, follow-up is 1 year. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee (METC Zuid-West Holland/Erasmus Medical Center; MEC-2020-0812). The results will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals and disseminated to patient organisations and media.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaQuality of LifeHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMulticenter Studies as TopicNeurosurgical ProceduresProspective StudiesNeurological oncologyNeurosurgeryQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID38684246
PMCPMC11086386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.