ArticleNeuro-oncology2024
BMScope: A scoping review to chart the evolving clinical study landscape in brain and leptomeningeal metastasis.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Brain metastasis: Opportunities for novel therapies.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026Review
- Crossing the blood-brain barrier: emerging therapeutic strategies for neurological disease.The Lancet. Neurology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecent studies have challenged the notion that patients with brain metastasis (BM) or leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) should be excluded from systemic therapy clinical trials. This scoping study summarizes the BM/LM clinical studies published between 2010 and 2023.
methodsMEDLINE, CINAHL, CAB Abstracts, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, HINARI, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE electronic databases were searched on June 21, 2021. An updated search was performed on February 21, 2023. Eligible studies investigated a therapeutic intervention in solid tumor patients with BM and/or LM and reported a patient outcome. Extracted study-level data, including study type, publication date, geographical location, number of BM/LM patients in the study, primary tumor type, and type of therapeutic intervention, were collected.
results4921 unique studies were eligible for analysis. The key finding is that BM/LM clinical research is expanding globally, both in observational studies and clinical trials. Despite the shift over time toward a higher proportion of systemic therapy trials, the majority still do not include patients with symptomatic disease and lack reporting of BM/LM-specific endpoints. Globally, there has been a trend to more international collaboration in BM/LM clinical studies.
conclusionsOur analysis of the BM/LM literature charts the evolving landscape of studies involving this previously excluded population. Given the increasing clinical research activity, particularly involving late-stage systemic therapy trials, it is imperative that due consideration is given to the intracranial activity of new investigational agents. Wider adoption of standardized reporting of intracranial-specific endpoints will facilitate the evaluation of relative intracranial efficacy.
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.