Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39022728›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2024

Insights into brain tumor diagnosis: exploring

E D Namiot, G M Zembatov, P P Tregub

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Adult Low-Grade Glioma WithCase reports in pathology · 2026
    Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

E D NamiotDepartment of Pathophysiology, First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
G M ZembatovDepartment of Pathophysiology, First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
P P TregubDepartment of Pathophysiology, First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Diagnosing brain tumors is critical due to their complex nature. This review explores the potential of Methods: The review surveys literature and cross-references findings with the OMIM database, examining 513 records. It pinpoints mutations suitable for Results: Amplifications in EGFR, MDM2, and MDM4, along with Y chromosome loss, chromosome 7 polysomy, and deletions of PTEN, CDKN2/p16, TP53, and DMBT1, correlate with poor prognosis in glioma patients. Protective genetic changes in glioma include increased expression of ADGRB3/1, IL12B, DYRKA1, VEGFC, LRRC4, and BMP4. Elevated MMP24 expression worsens prognosis in glioma, oligodendroglioma, and meningioma patients. Meningioma exhibits common chromosomal anomalies like loss of chromosomes 1, 9, 17, and 22, with specific genes implicated in their development. Main occurrences in medulloblastoma include the formation of isochromosome 17q and SHH signaling pathway disruption. Increased expression of BARHL1 is associated with prolonged survival. Adenomas mutations were reviewed with a focus on adenoma-carcinoma transition and different subtypes, with MMP9 identified as the main metalloprotease implicated in tumor progression. Discussion: Molecular-genetic diagnostics for common brain tumors involve diverse genetic anomalies.

Indexed as

ependymomaFISHglioblastomain situ hybridizationmedulloblastomameningiomaoligodendrogliomapituitary adenoma

Identifiers

PMID39022728
PMCPMC11252041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.