Observational studyJournal of neuro-oncology2026
Dose selection and clinical decision-making after Gamma Knife surgery for large brain metastases: implications for early identification of true progression.
Observational study 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate dose selection and post-treatment management after Gamma Knife surgery (GKS) for large brain metastases, with a focus on early identification of true progression.
methodsThis retrospective single-institution study included 143 patients with large brain metastases (tumor volume ≥ 4 cm
resultsMedian overall survival was 15.3 months. During follow-up, 47 lesions showed radiographic progression: 42 true progression, 4 pseudoprogression, and 1 intratumoral hemorrhage. The 6-, 12-, and 24-month cumulative incidences of true progression were 17.4%, 31.5%, and 33.1%, respectively. True progression did not differ by treatment modality or tumor volume. A marginal dose ≥ 57.6 Gy biologically effective dose (BED
conclusionA BED CLINICAL
trial registrationClinical trial number: not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42832083What 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.