Evidence mapPaperPMID 33718145Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

A Prognostic Model for Glioblastoma Patients Treated With Standard Therapy Based on a Prospective Cohort of Consecutive Non-Selected Patients From a Single Institution.

Armita Armina Abedi, Kirsten Grunnet, Ib Jarle Christensen, Signe Regner Michaelsen, Aida Muhic, Søren Møller, Benedikte Hasselbalch, Hans Skovgaard Poulsen, Thomas Urup

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Treatment of glioblastoma in Greenlandic patients.International journal of circumpolar health · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

9 authors.

Armita Armina AbediDepartment of Radiation Biology, The Finsen Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Kirsten GrunnetDepartment of Radiation Biology, The Finsen Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ib Jarle ChristensenDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hvidovre Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark.
Signe Regner MichaelsenDepartment of Radiation Biology, The Finsen Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Aida MuhicDepartment of Oncology, The Finsen Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Søren MøllerDepartment of Radiation Biology, The Finsen Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Benedikte HasselbalchDepartment of Radiation Biology, The Finsen Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Hans Skovgaard PoulsenDepartment of Radiation Biology, The Finsen Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Thomas UrupDepartment of Radiation Biology, The Finsen Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlioblastoma patients administered standard therapies, comprising maximal surgical resection, radiation therapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide, have a variable prognosis with a median overall survival of 15-16 months and a 2-year overall survival of 30%. The aim of this study was to develop a prognostic nomogram for overall survival for glioblastoma patients treated with standard therapy outside clinical trials.

methodsThe study included 680 consecutive, non-selected glioblastoma patients administered standard therapy as primary treatment between the years 2005 and 2016 at Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. The prognostic model was generated employing multivariate Cox regression analysis modeling overall survival.

resultsThe following poor prognostic factors were included in the final prognostic model for overall survival: Age (10-year increase: HR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.08-1.28, p < 0.001), ECOG performance status (PS) 1 vs. 0 (HR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.07-1.57, p = 0.007), PS 2 vs. 0 (HR = 2.99, 95% CI: 1.99-4.50, p < 0.001), corticosteroid use (HR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.18-1.70, p < 0.001), multifocal disease (HR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.25-2.13, p < 0.001), biopsy vs. resection (HR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.04-1.72, p = 0.02), un-methylated promoter of the MGMT (O

conclusionA nomogram for overall survival was established. This model can be used for risk stratification and treatment planning, as well as improve enrollment criteria for clinical trials.

Indexed as

biomarkersglioblastomaglioma grade IVMGMT = O6-DNA-methylguanine methyltransferasenomogramoverall survivalprognostic factorsprogression-free survival

Identifiers

PMID33718145
PMCPMC7946965

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.