| Title |
Interstitial chemotherapy for malignant gliomas: the Johns Hopkins experience
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, December 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11060-006-9303-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
H. Christopher Lawson, Prakash Sampath, Eileen Bohan, Michael C. Park, Namath Hussain, Alessandro Olivi, Jon Weingart, Lawrence Kleinberg, Henry Brem |
| Abstract |
Malignant gliomas are very difficult neoplasms for clinicians to treat. The reason for this is multifaceted. Many treatments that are effective for systemic cancer are unable to cross the blood-brain barrier and/or have unacceptable systemic toxicities. Consequently, in recent years an effort has been placed on trying to develop innovative local treatments that bypass the blood-brain barrier and allow for direct treatment in the central nervous system (CNS)-interstitial treatment. In this paper, we present our extensive experience in using interstitial chemotherapy as a strategy to treat malignant brain tumors at a single institution (The Johns Hopkins Hospital). We provide a comprehensive summary of our preclinical work on interstitial chemotherapy at the Hunterian Neurosurgery Laboratory, reviewing data on rat, rabbit, and monkey studies. Additionally, we present our clinical experience with randomized placebo-controlled studies for the treatment of malignant gliomas. We compare survival statistics for those patients who received placebo versus Gliadel as initial therapy (11.6 months vs. 13.9 months, respectively) and at the time of tumor recurrence (23 weeks vs. and 31 weeks, respectively). We also discuss the positive impact of local therapy in avoiding the toxicities associated with systemic treatments. Furthermore, we provide an overview of newer chemotherapeutic agents and other strategies used in interstitial treatment. Finally, we offer insight into some of the lessons we have learned from our unique perspective. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 101 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 23% |
| Researcher | 16 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 22 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 16% |
| Engineering | 12 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 10 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 26 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 November 2015.
All research outputs
#7,453,126
of 22,785,242 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#1,040
of 2,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,765
of 156,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,785,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,965 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 156,340 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.