ReviewAdvances and technical standards in neurosurgery2024
Supratentorial and Infratentorial Ependymoma.
Review in Advances and technical standards in neurosurgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ependymomas are the third most common intracranial tumor in children, presenting in both the supratentorial and infratentorial compartments. They may present in infants, young children, and adolescents with symptoms depending on size, location, and the age of the patient. The ideal imaging for evaluation and treatment is MRI. This is crucial for preoperative evaluation and planning, as well as postoperative assessment and evaluating the efficacy of treatment. Essentially without exception, aggressive surgery aimed at complete resection is the initial and most important factor in the long-term outcome of all these children. Histopathologic diagnosis for intracranial pediatric ependymoma has been narrowed to grade II and grade III, no longer characterized as classic and anaplastic. Subsequent conformal photon or proton beam irradiation is an established post-surgical therapy, with solid evidence that it benefits survival and offers lower toxicity to the normal brain of the young child. Although chemotherapeutic treatment has not been generally impactful, immunotherapeutic interventions may be on the horizon. Updated molecular subgrouping of ependymoma is changing the post-resection approach of these tumors with regard to both treatment and outcome. Excluding spinal ependymoma and subependymoma, there are four subtypes that are defined by genetic characteristics, two found in the supratentorial compartment, ST-EPN-YAP1 and ST-EPN-ZFTA, and two in the posterior fossa, PF-EPN-A and PF-EPN-B. Younger children harboring ZFTA fusion-positive supratentorial and type A posterior fossa tumors, regardless of histology, tend toward the poorest outcomes. On the contrary, older children with supratentorial YAP1 fusion-positive ependymomas and type B posterior fossa tumors may survive with surgery alone. The paradigm shift regarding the behavior of the various childhood ependymoma subtypes will hopefully lead to targeted, individualized therapies and improved outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39287805What 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.