ArticleNeuro-oncology2025
NANO-LM: An updated scorecard for the clinical assessment of patients with leptomeningeal metastases.
Article in Neuro-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06417710 (Standardized Clinical Assessment of Patients With Leptomeningeal Metastasis), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Standardized Clinical Assessment of Patients With Leptomeningeal Metastasis
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of CSF interleukin-6 in the prognosis of patients with Leptomeningeal metastases of glioblastoma.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Clinical predictors of leptomeningeal metastasis from lung adenocarcinoma based on retrospective analysis.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Article
- Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) 2009-2025: Broad scope and implementation-A progress report.Neuro-oncology · 2025Review
- TUXEDO-3: A phase 2 trial of patritumab deruxtecan for patients with leptomeningeal metastasis.Neuro-oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere are no validated tools for the clinical neurological assessment of patients with leptomeningeal metastases (LM). However, clinical examination during the course of the disease guides medical management and is part of response assessment in clinical trials. Because neuroimaging may not always be obtained owing to rapid clinical deterioration, clinical neurological assessment of LM is essential, and standardization is important to minimize rater disagreement.
methodsThe Response Assessment in Neuro-oncology-LM group launched a 2-step process, aiming at improving and standardizing the clinical assessment of patients with LM. We report here on the first step the establishment of a consensus scorecard. The task force had 9 virtual meetings to define general recommendations on neurological assessment and selected domains of interest that should be tested.
resultsFourteen domains of neurological symptoms and signs were selected: level of consciousness, cognition, nausea and vomiting, vision, eye movement, facial strength, hearing, swallowing, speech, limb strength, limb ataxia, walking, and bladder bowel functions. For each item, a clear instruction on how to perform the assessment is provided with scoring criteria between 0 and 2. The general clinical status of the patient and use of steroids, pain medications, and antiemetics should be documented. Neurological sequelae from previous brain metastases or cancer treatment should be rated at the baseline evaluation; it should be specified when symptoms or signs may be related to a condition other than LM. DISCUSSION: A revised Neurological Assessment in Neuro-Oncology-LM consensus scorecard for clinical assessment has been established. An international prospective validation study of the proposal is currently ongoing (NCT06417710).
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.