ArticleInterventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences2025
Comparison of single- versus multi-drug treatment for intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) in children with retinoblastoma.
Article in Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Intra-arterial chemotherapy for retinoblastoma: a structured narrative review.World journal of pediatric surgery · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
ObjectiveIntra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) is a well-established treatment for retinoblastoma (RB). However, there are no standardized recommendations regarding the choice of drugs. This study compares the outcomes of single- versus multi-drug therapy.MethodsClinical data was reviewed for RB children treated with IAC at our institution between 2018 and 2023. Patients were divided into single- and multi-drug treatment groups. Clinical parameters included total number of IAC treatments, treatment-related adverse events, duration of additional post-IAC treatments, residual disease, recurrence, and the need for enucleation.ObservationsA total of 101 IAC treatments were included. Multi-drug therapy showed improved outcomes as compared to single-drug therapy, particularly in RB group B and C patients. After multi-drug IAC, less secondary treatment time was required compared to single-drug treatment (2.1 months versus 4.6 months; p = 0.019). Group B and C patients required a median of 8.5 fewer months of secondary treatment after multi- vs. single-drug IAC. Patients treated with multi-drug IAC had an overall lower rate of residual disease or recurrence compared to single-drug IAC patients (26.3% vs. 35.7% recurrence; 52.6% vs. 71.4% residual). In group B and C patients, the difference was more pronounced (12.5% vs. 40% recurrence; 37.5% vs. 60% residual). The overall success rate in preventing enucleation was 90.9%.ConclusionsIAC treatment for RB is safe and effective. IAC prevented enucleation in >90% of our patients. Multi-drug IAC patients required less secondary treatment post-IAC, particularly group B and C patients.
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.