SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2024
Cerebellar glioblastoma in adults: a comparative single-center matched pair analysis and systematic review of the literature.
Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Case Report: Rare presentations of glioblastoma: three multifocal and one cerebellar cases highlighting the value of shared clinical experience.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Recurrence patterns and clinical outcomes in adult cerebellar glioblastoma.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe rarity of cerebellar glioblastoma presents a significant challenge in clinical practice due to the lack of extensive prognostic data on long-term survival rates, rendering it an underrepresented entity compared to its supratentorial counterpart. This study aims to analyze potential differences in survival outcome between patients with cerebellar and supratentorial glioblastomas.
methodsFrom 2009 to 2020, 8 patients underwent surgical treatment for cerebellar glioblastoma at the authors' institution. These patients were individually matched with a cohort of 205 consecutive patients from our institutional database with supratentorial glioblastoma, taking into account key prognostic parameters. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were compared. Additionally, we performed a systematic literature review to compile further survival data on cerebellar glioblastoma patients.
resultsThe median OS for cerebellar glioblastoma patients was 18 months (95% CI 11-25). The balanced matched-pair analysis showed no significant difference in survival when compared to patients with supratentorial glioblastoma, exhibiting a median OS of 23 months (95% CI 0-62) (p = 0.63). Respective values for PFS were 8 months (95% CI 4-12) for cerebellar and 7 months (95% CI 0-16) for supratentorial glioblastoma (p = 0.2). The systematic review revealed that median OS for cerebellar glioblastoma in current literature ranges from 7 to 21 months.
conclusionsThe present findings indicate that patients with supra- and infratentorial glioblastoma do not significantly differ in regard to survival outcome parameters. This similarity in prognosis might encourage clinicians to consider surgical interventions for both supra- and infratentorial glioblastoma in a similar manner.
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.