ArticleNeuro-oncology2024
Risk of new tumor, carotid stenosis, and stroke after stereotactic radiosurgery for pituitary tumor: A multicenter study of 2254 patients with imaging follow-up.
Article in Neuro-oncology, 2024. 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.
- Pituitary Society Delphi consensus on the role of radiotherapy for pituitary adenomas.Pituitary · 2026Review
- Long-term outcomes of adjuvant proton radiotherapy (PRT) for residual pituitary adenoma (PA) in adults - a retrospective, single institute experience.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Gamma knife radiosurgery vs fractionated radiotherapy : gender difference in efficacy and toxicity.Pituitary · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA higher risk of secondary brain tumor, carotid stenosis, and stroke has been reported after conventional sella irradiation for pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNET). Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), which is a more focused approach, is now increasingly used instead. The aim was to assess the risk of secondary brain tumor, carotid stenosis/occlusion, and stroke after SRS.
methodsIn this multicentric retrospective study, 2254 patients with PitNET were studied, 1377 in the exposed group, and 877 in the control group.
resultsThere were 9840.1 patient-years at risk for the SRS and 5266.5 for the control group. The 15-year cumulative probability of secondary intracranial tumor was 2.3% (95% CI: 0.5%, 4.1%) for SRS and 3.7% (95% CI: 0%, 8.7%) for the control group (P = .6), with an incidence rate of 1.32 per 1000 and 0.95 per 1000, respectively. SRS was not associated with an increased risk of tumorigenesis when stratified by age (HR: 1.59 [95% CI: 0.57, 4.47], Pp = .38). The 15-year probability of new carotid stenosis/occlusion was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.2, 1.6) in the SRS and 2% (95% CI: 0, 4.4) in the control group (P = .8). The 15-year probability of stroke was 2.6% (95% CI: 0.6%, 4.6%) in the SRS and 11.1% (95% CI: 6%, 15.9%) in the control group (P < .001). In Cox multivariate analysis stratified by age, SRS (HR 1.85 [95% CI:0.64, 5.35], P = .26) was not associated with risk of new stroke.
conclusionsNo increased risk of long-term secondary brain tumor, new stenosis or occlusion, and stroke was demonstrated in the SRS group compared to the control in this study with imaging surveillance.
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.