ReviewSurgical neurology international2026
Coexistence of histologically distinct intracranial tumors: Case series, literature review, and meta-analysis.
Review in Surgical neurology international, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Multiple intracranial tumors of different histological origin occurring in the same patient are uncommon. The annual incidence is estimated at <1/million, and the management options remain demanding in some cases due to different pathogenesis and biological behaviors. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed six patients operated on at our department between 2011 and 2025 who presented with two concurrent non-adjacent brain tumors of distinct pathology, one meningioma and one intraparenchymal lesion. This is followed by a narrative literature review conducted according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines and a meta-analysis along with exploratory meta-regression analyses. Results: Our series had a mean age of 56 years, with the female sex twice as common; the most common tumor combination was a meningioma with a glioma. The literature review included 76 studies, with 16 of them getting meta-analyzed. There was no sex predilection, and the pooled mean age was 52 years. Meningioma along with a glioma is the most common tumor combination, and the most encountered tumor types are a meningioma and a pituitary adenoma. Mortality rates were low ( Conclusion: The presence of such brain neoplasms in one patient is a compelling medical entity, and its pathogenesis remains questionable. Surgical treatment, at one or two stages, remains the gold standard, while further research needs to be conducted in order to explain any possible pathogenesis and reinforce management options.
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.