ArticleNeuro-oncology advances
Comparative evaluation of the diagnostic and prognostic performance of CNSide™ versus standard cytology for leptomeningeal disease.
Article in Neuro-oncology advances. 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.
- Early experience with cerebrospinal fluid cell-free DNA molecular profiling in a neuro-oncology practice.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- Preliminary assessment of an MRI-based grading system for leptomeningeal disease: an exploratory prognostic framework.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Longitudinal CSF Tumor Cell Enumeration and Mutational Analysis as a Driver for Leptomeningeal Disease Management.Cancers · 2025Article
- Utility of cerebrospinal fluid circulating tumor cell quantification and next-generation sequencing in patients with suspicion for leptomeningeal disease.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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This retrospective study compares the real-world performance of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) CNSide™ versus cytology in leptomeningeal disease (LMD). Methods: Consecutive patients with suspected LMD who underwent lumbar punctures for CSF cytology and CNSide™ from January 2020 to December 2022 were reviewed. LMD was classified by EANO criteria. Descriptive statistics, confusion matrix, Kaplan-Meier curves, and Cox proportional regression were used. Results: Median age for 87 evaluable patients was 63 years (range: 23-93); 82 (94%) met EANO criteria for possible/probable/confirmed LMD (EANO/LMD). The commonest primary cancers were breast (36,44.0%) and lung (34,41.5%). Primary lung harbored actionable mutations in 18 (53.0%); primary breast expressed hormone receptors in 27 (75%), and HER2 amplification in 8 (22%). Uncontrolled systemic disease was detected in 35 (40%), while 25 (46%) received systemic therapy with medium/high CNS penetrance at LMD diagnosis. The median time from initial cancer to LMD diagnosis was 31 months (range: 13-73). LMD was confirmed by CSF cytology in 23/82 (28%), all identified by CNSide™. CNSide™ identified 13 additional cases (36/82, 43.9%), increasing diagnostic yield by 56.5%. Median overall survival (mOS) was 31 weeks (95%CI: 21-43), significantly worse for CNSide™ positive versus negative: 4.0 versus 16.0 weeks, respectively (HR = 0.50, Conclusions: This retrospective, real-world analysis of CNSide™ showed increased sensitivity versus cytology and provided clinically relevant molecular CSF analyses.
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.