Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7964978›Full record

ReviewJournal of neuro-oncology1994

Comparative aspects of neoplastic invasion of the brain.

H E Kaiser

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neuro-oncology, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

H E KaiserDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Maryland at Baltimore 21201.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review of the invasion of the human brain by tumors is based upon a comparative approach. The taxonomic distribution of a structure of the CNS to be considered a brain is present in the following taxonomic groups: Mollusca (Cephalopoda, Pulmonata) Sipunculida, Echiurida, Annelida, Arthropoda and Vertebrata (fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals). The comparative approach (inter-, and intraspecies specific) provides a more informative, indicative, understanding of invasion of the human brain; especially in view of the morphological and functional heterogeneity of structures playing a role in the neoplastic invasion to and from the brain. It can be distinguished among primary invasiveness (as cancer in situ) and local recurrence on the one hand and remote spreading, such as metastasis, on the other. A review of the recent literature arranged according to tumor types is provided and comparative conclusions elucidated, especially to underline the tumor specificity of the invasion of brain tumors, especially the second or intra-species specific approach is therapeutically important. This is set forth against a background of epidemiology and species specificity. Due to the lack of bony skull capsule an extensive knowledge of the brain of cephalopod molluscs with its functional and morphological similarity to the human eye, and also that of the pulmonate Helix pomatia, the vineyard snail, could well serve as excellent oncologic models. Some conclusions can be drawn dealing with the theoretical possibility of first appearance of the different and heterogeneous components of the complicated structure known as brain including its supporting accessory organs during phylogeny.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrain NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm InvasivenessPhylogenySpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID7964978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.