Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40556668›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2025

Optimizing outcomes in intracranial ependymoma: a contemporary review.

Zhenjiang Pan, Jing Bao, Shepeng Wei

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Zhenjiang PanDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shidong Hospital, Yangpu District, Shanghai, China.
Jing BaoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shidong Hospital, Yangpu District, Shanghai, China.
Shepeng WeiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shidong Hospital, Yangpu District, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intracranial ependymomas are glial tumors arising from the ependymal lining of the ventricular system, most commonly affecting young children (median age: 5 years), though they can occur across all age groups. Typically located in the posterior fossa, they account for fewer than 10% of pediatric central nervous system neoplasms and show a slight male predominance. Clinical symptoms vary by location, with posterior fossa tumors often causing hydrocephalus-related signs, and supratentorial lesions presenting with seizures or focal deficits. The 2021 WHO CNS5 classification integrates histologic, anatomic, and molecular features, distinguishing prognostically significant subgroups such as posterior fossa group A (PFA) and supratentorial ZFTA-fusion ependymomas. Diagnosis requires histologic confirmation, aided by MRI and cerebrospinal fluid analysis, with dissemination present in up to 10% of cases at diagnosis. Maximal safe surgical resection is the cornerstone of treatment. Children over one year with grade 2 or 3 tumors typically receive adjuvant focal radiotherapy, while chemotherapy is used to delay irradiation in infants or after subtotal resection. Disseminated disease may require craniospinal irradiation or systemic therapy. Despite multimodal treatment, prognosis remains guarded. Ten-year overall survival ranges from 50% to 75%, influenced by extent of resection, molecular subtype, and age. This review synthesizes current knowledge of ependymoma pathogenesis, classification, diagnosis, and therapy, highlighting the growing role of molecular profiling and the importance of specialized, multidisciplinary care.

Indexed as

gross total resectionintracranial ependymomamolecular classificationpediatric neuro-oncologyradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID40556668
PMCPMC12185496

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.