ReviewDiscover oncology2025
Neoadjuvant stereotactic radiotherapy for brain metastasis: a review of ongoing clinical trials.
Review in Discover oncology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
pruposeNeoadjuvant stereotactic radiotherapy (NaSRT) represents a promising approach in managing brain metastases, potentially offering advantages over traditional postoperative radiotherapy.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of the ClinicalTrials.gov website for studies investigating neoadjuvant radiotherapy for brain metastases, either as a single arm or in comparison with adjuvant radiotherapy.
resultsThis review analyzes 18 registered clinical trials investigating NaSRT, focusing on variations in trial design, inclusion criteria, and endpoints being explored. These trials aim to assess outcomes such as local control, systemic therapy integration, and the reduction of complications, including leptomeningeal disease and radiation necrosis. The diversity of methodologies underscores the need for standardized protocols to enhance comparability and future applicability.
conclusionBy highlighting current trends and research gaps, this review provides insights into the evolving role of NaSRT, emphasizing its potential to influence treatment strategies and improve patient outcomes.
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.