| Title |
Patterns of care in recurrent glioblastoma in Switzerland: a multicentre national approach based on diagnostic nodes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11060-015-1957-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
T. Hundsberger, A. F. Hottinger, U. Roelcke, P. Roth, D. Migliorini, P. Y. Dietrich, K. Conen, G. Pesce, E. Hermann, A. Pica, M. W. Gross, D. Brügge, L. Plasswilm, M. Weller, P. M. Putora |
| Abstract |
Despite moderate improvements in outcome of glioblastoma after first-line treatment with chemoradiation recent clinical trials failed to improve the prognosis of recurrent glioblastoma. In the absence of a standard of care we aimed to investigate institutional treatment strategies to identify similarities and differences in the pattern of care for recurrent glioblastoma. We investigated re-treatment criteria and therapeutic pathways for recurrent glioblastoma of eight neuro-oncology centres in Switzerland having an established multidisciplinary tumour-board conference. Decision algorithms, differences and consensus were analysed using the objective consensus methodology. A total of 16 different treatment recommendations were identified based on combinations of eight different decision criteria. The set of criteria implemented as well as the set of treatments offered was different in each centre. For specific situations, up to 6 different treatment recommendations were provided by the eight centres. The only wide-range consensus identified was to offer best supportive care to unfit patients. A majority recommendation was identified for non-operable large early recurrence with unmethylated MGMT promoter status in the fit patients: here bevacizumab was offered. In fit patients with late recurrent non-operable MGMT promoter methylated glioblastoma temozolomide was recommended by most. No other majority recommendations were present. In the absence of strong evidence we identified few consensus recommendations in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. This contrasts the limited availability of single drugs and treatment modalities. Clinical situations of greatest heterogeneity may be suitable to be addressed in clinical trials and second opinion referrals are likely to yield diverging recommendations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 38% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 41 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 11 | 26% |
| Unknown | 9 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 42% |
| Psychology | 3 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 13 | 30% |
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 12 January 2021.
All research outputs
#6,743,612
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#849
of 2,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,471
of 279,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#10
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 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 2,971 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 70% 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 279,096 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 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.