ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews2025
A New Relevant Integrated Radiologic and Surgical Classification Scheme for Giant Cell Tumors of Bones.
Article in Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionConventional classification systems for giant cell tumors (GCTs) lack robust correlation with management and clinical outcomes. We propose a new radiologic classification system based on surgically relevant features to address this shortcoming.
methodsThis IRB-approved single-institution retrospective study involved 35 extremity GCTs from 2013 to 2023 with preoperative radiographs and cross-sectional imaging (MRI and/or CT). An experienced musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologist and orthopaedic oncologist independently assessed tumors according to the Campanacci or new grading system, defined on 1 to 3 scale: (1) intraosseous contained tumor, (2) intraosseous noncontained tumor with extraosseous implant accessible through single incision, and (3) intraosseous noncontained tumor with an extraosseous soft tissue implant nonaccessible from single incision alone. Interrater agreement was determined through the intraclass correlation coefficient. The two-way Friedman test with rater and grading system as factors was used to compare system grading similarity.
resultsThirty patients underwent curettage, five underwent resection; 10 experienced local recurrence. Intraclass correlation coefficients between raters for the Campanacci and novel grading systems were 0.83 and 0.79, respectively. However, compared with the novel system, Campanacci grades were significantly higher by an average of 0.34 ± 0.68 and 0.46 ± 0.70 for the first and second raters, respectively (P = 0.003). None of the patients who underwent resection experienced local recurrence, but in patients who underwent curettage, recurrence rates were higher in Campanacci versus novel grade 1 tumors (29% vs. 17%). DISCUSSION: The novel GCT grading system demonstrates excellent interrater agreement, and classified more nonrecurrent curetted tumors as low grade, suggesting improved predictive performance compared with the Campanacci classification.
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.