ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2024
Radiotherapy dosing in intracranial ependymoma using the national cancer database.
Article in Journal of 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.
- East Asian multi-centre study on clinical long-term outcomes of postoperative proton beam therapy for localised paediatric intracranial ependymoma.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Recent Advances in Combination Therapy of YAP Inhibitors with Physical Anti-Cancer Strategies.Biomolecules · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo determine the dose-dependent effect of adjuvant radiotherapy on survival for pediatric intracranial ependymomas and explore patient and disease characteristics that experience survival benefit from higher doses.
methodsData was accessed from the National Cancer Database. Inclusion criteria was comprised of a diagnosis of non-metastatic intracranial ependymoma, World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2 or 3, surgical resection, adjuvant radiotherapy between 4500-6300 cGy, and non-missing survivorship data. Crude and adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated to estimate the associations of patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics with overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimations were used to visualize survival curves for dosing for the general cohort and by subgroups (age, resection extent, and grade).
resultsOf the 1154 patients who met inclusion criteria, 405 received ≤ 5400 cGy and 749 received > 5400 cGy. We found no difference in OS crude (0.95, 95% CI 0.72-1.06) or adjusted (0.88, 95% CI 0.46-1.69) HR for those receiving ≤ 5400 cGy. KM curves showed no difference in OS for dosing for the general cohort based on age, surgical extent, and grade. However, there was better OS in those with WHO grade 2 tumors compared to grade 3 regardless of dose received.
conclusionsThere was no difference in OS between patients who received ≤ 5400 cGy compared to > 5400 cGy. We found improved OS in those with grade 2 tumors compared to grade 3, however there was no difference in OS based on dose received by tumor grade, age, or resection extent. Limitations in data available prevent exploring other outcomes or toxicity.
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.