ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2026
Stereotactic radiosurgery for pineal gland metastases: results from the international radiosurgery research foundation.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2026. 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
29 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMetastases to the pineal gland are rare. Surgical excision can be associated with high rates of morbidity. Alternatively, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases in the pineal region has not been vigorously studied.
methodsWe performed a multi-institutional retrospective study for patients treated with SRS for pineal region metastases at treatment centers that comprise the International Radiosurgery Research Foundation (IRRF). Demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment parameters, and clinical outcomes were collected. The primary endpoint was local tumor control (LC). Secondary endpoints included: Overall survival (OS), distant tumor control (DC), and adverse radiation events (AREs). Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate time to event endpoints and prognostic factors respectively.
resultsTwenty-six patients (16 female, 62% median age 60 years (range: 16–87) with 26 pineal metastases were managed with SRS. Primary tumor histology was lung (46.2%), breast (26.9%), melanoma (7.7%), and other (19.2%). SRS treatment was up-front in the majority of cases (61.5%), adjuvant (19.2%) or salvage therapy (19.2%). The median prescription dose was 18 Gy in a single fraction. Median follow-up was 9 months (range 3–101). LC at 3-,6-,12-, and 24-months was 100%, 94.4%, 87.7%, and 87.7% respectively. DC at the same intervals were 79.2%, 73.9%, 52.8%, and 35.2%. Median OS was 32 months (range: 6–52). No evaluated prognostic factors were significantly associated with LC, DC, or OS. Among the 13 patients with symptoms related to their pineal tumor at baseline, 7 improved and 6 remained stable following SRS. Leptomeningeal spread occurred in 7.7% of patients and no cases of post-SRS hydrocephalus were observed. Overall AREs occurred in 14 (53.8%) patients, with a median time to onset of 4 months.
conclusionSRS offers excellent local tumor control of pineal metastases with high rates of symptomatic improvement, minimal leptomeningeal spread, and limited post-SRS complications. Despite this, distant tumor control is limited in this setting and may be improved by improved systemic disease management.
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.