ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2025
Adult ependymoma: results from the Dutch Brain Tumour Registry on primary treatment and survival.
Article in Journal of neuro-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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEpendymomas are rare tumours of the central nervous system (CNS). This study reports real-world data regarding primary treatment and outcome for adult patients diagnosed in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2023.
methodsDiagnostic and treatment data on adult patients with a newly diagnosed ependymoma were obtained from the Dutch Brain Tumour Registry. Factors associated with incomplete resection and adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) were identified using logistic regression analyses, thereby accounting for variation between CNS regional tumour boards through mixed-effect modelling when relevant. In case of variation, case-mix adjusted ratios of tumour boards were evaluated in funnel plots. Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) at 5 years were assessed with the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression models. Analyses were performed on multiple imputed datasets (m = 10) to account for missing data.
resultsAmong 575 patients, 74 (12.9%) ependymomas were located in the supratentorial region, 129 (22.5%) in the posterior fossa, and 370 (64.6%) in the spine. Incomplete resection occurred more often in posterior fossa, and in larger and metastatic/multifocal ependymomas. Adjuvant RT was administered to 47 of 173 patients with a metastatic/multifocal and/or incompletely removed WHO grade 1–2 tumour (27.2%), and to 26 of 34 patients with a WHO grade 3 ependymoma (76.5%). Adjuvant RT conferred significant survival benefit (hazard ratio 0.17, 95% confidence interval 0.06–0.53, p < 0.01) following adjustment for other factors.
conclusionThis study substantiates the benefit of adjuvant RT for selected adult patients with an ependymoma and emphasizes the need for more coordinated management across tumour boards.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41191161What 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.