ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Neurological adverse events of mitotane in adrenocortical carcinoma: results of a pilot study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functional and behavioral outcomes in pediatric adrenal carcinoma under mitotane therapy: a caregiver-reported pilot study.Endocrine oncology (Bristol, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Mitotane, the only drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of adrenocortical carcinoma, is associated with several side effects including neurotoxicity. The aim of our study is to investigate the relationship between mitotane plasma levels and neurological toxicity. Methods: We have considered five patients affected by adrenocortical carcinoma treated with mitotane. The neurological assessment included a neurological examination, an electroencephalogram, event-related potentials (P300), and a neuropsychological assessment. All of the patients were first considered at the onset of symptoms of neurotoxicity or when mitotanemia levels were above 18 mg/L, for the second time at mitotanemia normalization and subsequently at its further increase, or in case of persistent neurological abnormalities, some months after normalization. Results: At the first neurotoxicity, four patients showed impaired neurological examination, electroencephalogram, and P300; three patients had impaired neuropsychological assessment; one patient, only P300. At mitotanemia normalization, the neurological examination became normal in all patients and electroencephalogram normalized in one patient, improved in another one, continuing to be altered in the other three. P300 latency and neuropsychological assessment normalized in two patients and persisted altered in the patient experiencing long-term mitotane toxicity. At the third evaluation, in the patient with prolonged mitotane toxicity, the normal mitotanemia in the previous 9 months restored P300 and improved the electroencephalogram but not the neuropsychological assessment. In the two patients experiencing a further rise of mitotanemia, neurological examination was normal but P300 and electroencephalogram were altered. Conclusion: The results of our study highlighted the presence of neurophysiological and neuropsychological abnormalities associated with mitotane values above 18 mg/L.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.