WHO grade II diffuse low-grade gliomas (DLGGs) were recently divided into sub-groups on the basis of their molecular profiles. IDH wild-type (IDH-wt) tumors seem to be associated with unfavorable prognoses due to biological similarities to glioblastomas. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature examining epidemiology, clinical characteristics, management, and the outcome of IDH-wt grade II DLGGs. According to PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive review of studies published from January 2009 to October 2017 was carried out. The authors identified series that examined the prevalence rate, clinical and radiological characteristics, treatment, and outcome of IDH-wt DLGGs. Variables influencing outcomes were analyzed using a random-effects meta-analysis model. Finally, a meta-regression analysis was performed to examine the impact of therapeutic strategies on the effect-size. Twenty-two studies were included in this systematic review. The IDH-wt prevalence rate was 22.9% (95% CI 18.4-27.4%). The hazard ratio for this molecular subgroup in the DLGGs population was 3.46 (95% CI 2.24-5.36; p < 0.001), and the heterogeneity was significant (I2 = 85%, τ2 = 0.88) (HR range 1.28-376). Nonetheless, publication bias did not affect the analysis (p = 0.176). The meta-regression revealed that the extent of resection and post-operative chemotherapy affected the outcome in the IDH-wt subgroup (p < 0.001 and 0.015, respectively), with no significant association of the HR with the rate of RT or RT + CHT. The prevalence of IDH-wt tumors is approximately 23% of DLGGs. The absence of IDH mutation is associated with a heterogeneous outcome, and its therapeutic relevance for postoperative management remains unclear. Maximal surgical resection improves the overall survival in the DLGGs population, beyond molecular status. Further molecular stratification is needed to better understand IDH-wt behavior and therapeutic response.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 November 2018.
All research outputs
#15,835,599
of 26,369,011 outputs
Outputs from Neurosurgical Review
#318
of 822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,851
of 345,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurosurgical Review
#5
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,369,011 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 822 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 345,992 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
