ReviewActa neurochirurgica2026
Current evidence on the cell of origin of meningiomas disputes the arachnoid cap cell dogma.
Review in Acta neurochirurgica, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor over a century, the dominant hypothesis has maintained that meningiomas arise exclusively from arachnoid cap cells. However, emerging evidence from single-cell transcriptomics, spatial sequencing, developmental biology, and transgenic animal models suggests a significantly more complex and heterogeneous cellular origin.
methodsThis mini-review revisits historical perspectives and critically evaluates the limitations of the traditional arachnoid-based paradigm. By synthesizing classical histological insights with contemporary molecular and proteomic data, the study explores alternative hypotheses, particularly those implicating fibroblast-like or regionally distinct meningeal progenitors.
resultsThe synthesis of multi-omic and developmental data indicates that a singular cellular source is insufficient to account for the clinical and biological diversity of meningiomas. Findings suggest that meningioma ontogeny is likely driven by a broader spectrum of progenitors whose characteristics vary according to anatomical location and embryological lineage.
conclusionsA redefinition of meningioma ontogeny is necessary. Future classification and therapeutic strategies should reflect the inherent diversity of their cellular sources and anatomical environments, moving beyond the classical arachnoid-cap-cell model.
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.