ArticleCureus2026
Histopathological Risk Features in Primary and Secondary Enucleation for Group D Retinoblastoma: A Clinicopathological Correlation Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective Group D retinoblastoma (RB) represents advanced intraocular disease with a substantial risk of treatment failure. Although globe-sparing therapies have improved ocular salvage rates, there is limited knowledge regarding the histopathological risk profile of enucleated Group D eyes, particularly when enucleation is performed after failed conservative treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the presence of high-risk histopathological features in Group D eyes undergoing primary versus secondary enucleation. Methods This study was designed as a focused secondary histopathological analysis of enucleated eyes from a previously reported cohort of Group D RB patients managed at a tertiary care center. Eight eyes underwent enucleation: four (50%) underwent primary enucleation due to advanced disease at presentation, and four (50%) underwent secondary enucleation following the failure of globe-sparing therapy. All specimens were examined for high-risk histopathological features, including post-laminar optic nerve invasion, optic nerve cut-end involvement, massive choroidal invasion, and scleral invasion. Fisher's exact test was used, and odds ratios (OR) with confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to explore differences between the groups. Results High-risk histopathological features were identified in four of eight eyes (50%). One of the four eyes that underwent primary enucleation (25%) demonstrated high-risk features, compared with three of the four eyes that underwent secondary enucleation (75%). Fisher's exact test showed no statistically significant association between enucleation timing and high-risk pathology (p = 0.49). The OR indicated lower odds of high-risk pathology with primary enucleation (OR: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.005-2.73), although the confidence intervals were wide due to the small sample size. Conclusions High-risk histopathological features were more frequently observed in Group D RB eyes undergoing secondary enucleation after failed globe-sparing therapy. These findings suggest that delaying enucleation may allow the progression of microscopic disease that is not clinically apparent and highlight the importance of timely enucleation in selected advanced cases. This clinicopathological correlation complements reported clinical outcomes and supports careful risk assessment when considering globe-sparing approaches in Group D disease.
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.