↓ Skip to main content

A meta-analysis of temozolomide versus radiotherapy in elderly glioblastoma patients

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuro-Oncology, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
A meta-analysis of temozolomide versus radiotherapy in elderly glioblastoma patients
Published in
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, November 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11060-013-1294-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

An-an Yin, Sang Cai, Yu Dong, Lu-hua Zhang, Bo-lin Liu, Jin-xiang Cheng, Xiang Zhang

Abstract

Temozolomide (TMZ) alone has been proposed as a promising alternative to radiotherapy (RT) in elderly glioblastoma (GBM) patients. We report a meta-analysis to systematically evaluate TMZ monotherapy in older GBM patients. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane database. Studies comparing TMZ versus RT in elderly patients (≥ 65 years) with newly diagnosed GBM were eligible for inclusion. Two randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and three comparative studies were included in the analyses, which revealed an overall survival (OS) advantage for TMZ compared with RT (HR [hazard ratio] 0.86, 95 % CI [confidence interval] 0.74-1.00). However, a sensitivity analysis of 2 RCTs only supported its non-inferiority (HR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.66-1.27). Most elderly patients tolerated TMZ despite an increased risk of grade 3-4 (G3-4) toxicities, especially hematological toxicities. The quality of life was similar between the groups. In the MGMT analysis, methylated tumors were associated with a longer OS than unmethylated tumors among elderly patients receiving TMZ monotherapy (HR 0.50, 95 % CI 0.35-0.70). Moreover, in patients with methylated tumors, TMZ was more beneficial than RT alone in improving OS (TMZ vs. RT: HR 0.66, 95 % CI 0.47-0.93) whereas the opposite was true for those with unmethylated tumors (HR 1.32, 95 % CI 1.00-1.76). Although the meta-analysis demonstrated the non-inferiority to RT in improving OS, TMZ alone was not a straightforward solution for elderly GBM patients because of an increased risk of G3-4 toxicities, especially hematological toxicities. MGMT testing might be helpful for determining individualized treatment.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Other 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Mathematics 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 16 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 February 2018.
All research outputs
#6,457,954
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#812
of 2,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,436
of 213,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#7
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,980 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 213,916 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.