ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2026
Intratumoral hemorrhage in patients with brain metastasis from systemic tumors: risk factors and prognostic assessment.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIntracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a serious complication in patients with brain metastases (BM), yet reliable risk stratification tools are lacking. Existing hemorrhage scores, such as HAS-BLED, were developed for cardiovascular populations and have not been validated for BM. We aimed to identify specific risk factors for intratumoral hemorrhage in BM and to develop a predictive model.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of 806 adult patients diagnosed with BM between 2004 and 2014 at a single tertiary centre. Intratumoral ICH events unrelated to surgery, referred to as BM hemorrhage, were analyzed. Multivariate regression analysis identified independent risk factors. Predictive performance of existing hemorrhage scores and a newly derived score was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
resultsBM hemorrhage occurred in 96 of 806 patients (11.9%). Independent risk factors included multiple BM (OR 2.1), primary tumor histology of melanoma (OR 5.0) or seminoma (OR 7.0), and antiplatelet therapy (OR 2.1). Anticoagulation, cardiovascular risk factors, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, anti-VEGF therapy, and steroids were not associated with hemorrhage risk. A novel BM-specific score derived from these factors showed a significant discrimination (AUC 0.75), outperforming HAS-BLED (AUC 0.54) and other established models.
conclusionBM hemorrhage is primarily driven by tumor-related characteristics and antiplatelet therapy rather than traditional bleeding risk factors. Conventional hemorrhage scores are not suitable for this population. The proposed BM-specific risk score provides improved prediction and may support individualized risk assessment and clinical decision-making. Prospective validation is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42412253What 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.