OBJECTIVEA meta-analysis was performed to understand disparities in the representation of female authorship within the neurosurgical literature and implications for career advancement of women in neurosurgery.METHODSAuthor names for articles published in 16 of the top neurosurgical journals from 2002 to 2019 were obtained from MEDLINE. The gender of each author was determined using automated prediction methods. Publication trends were compared over time and across subdisciplines. Female authorship was also compared to the proportionate composition of women in the field over time.RESULTSThe metadata obtained from 16 major neurosurgical journals yielded 66,546 research articles. Gender was successfully determined for 96% (127,809/133,578) of first and senior authors, while the remainder (3.9%) were unable to be determined through prediction methods. Across all years, 13.3% (8826) of articles had female first authorship and 9.1% (6073) had female senior authorship. Female first authorship increased significantly over time from 5.8% in 2002 to 17.2% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Female senior authorship also increased significantly over time, from 5.5% in 2002 to 12.0% in 2019 (p < 0.001). The journals with the highest proportions of female first authors and senior authors were the Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics (33.5%) and the Asian Journal of Neurosurgery (23.8%), respectively. Operative Neurosurgery had the lowest fraction of female first (12.4%) and senior (4.7%) authors. There was a significant difference between the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical trainees and the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical first (p < 0.001) and senior (p < 0.001) authors. Articles were also more likely to have a female first author if the senior author of the article was female (OR 2.69, CI 2.52–2.86; p < 0.001). From 1944 to 2019, the Journal of Neurosurgery showed a steady increase in female first and senior authorship, with a plateau beginning in the 1990s.CONCLUSIONSLarge meta-analysis techniques have the potential to effectively leverage large amounts of bibliometric data to quantify the representation of female authorship in the neurosurgical literature. The proportion of female authors in major neurosurgical journals has steadily increased. However, the rate of increase in female senior authorship has lagged behind the rate of increase in first authorship, indicating a disparity in academic advancement in women in neurosurgery.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Clinical trials for brain tumors represent a significant opportunity for both patients and providers to understand and combat a disease with substantial morbidity. The aim of this study was to quantify and map ethnic and racial representation in brain tumor trials and examine the potential gaps in trial recruitment. We also show that these representation gaps persist even in large multicultural cities like New York City. Methods We analyzed brain tumor clinical trials registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov between July 1, 2005 and completed on or before November 11, 2017. We used a combination of PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar to find associated publications and obtained trial information as well as patient demographic information (when available) including race or ancestry. Results Out of 471 trials, 27% had no published results. Only 28.4% of trials with results reported race or ethnicity of trial participants, with no observed upward trend by year. Whites were significantly overrepresented in trials for metastatic brain tumors (P &lt; .001) and high-grade trials (P &lt; .001). Blacks/African Americans (AAs), Hispanics, and Asians were significantly underrepresented (P &lt; .001) in high-grade trials, while only Blacks/AAs were underrepresented in trials for metastatic brain tumors (P &lt; .001). Representation gaps were not observed in pediatric trials. Despite being a multicultural hub, New York City displayed similar gaps in trial representation. Conclusions Despite increasing representation in the American population, minorities are underrepresented in brain tumor trials. In addition, despite numerous legal requirements and ethical mandates, published results including race-based information are remarkably absent from 70% of brain tumor trials.

Background The ClearPoint neuronavigation system affords real-time magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guidance during stereotactic procedures. While such information confers potential clinical benefits, additional operative time may be needed. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of procedural time associated with ClearPoint Stereotaxis, with hypothesis that this procedural time is comparable with that associated with frame-based biopsy. Results Of the 52 patients evaluated, the total procedural time for ClearPoint stereotactic biopsy averaged 150.0 (±40.4) minutes, of which 111.5 (±16.5) minutes were dedicated to real-time MRI acquisition and trajectory adjustment. This procedural time is within the range of those reported for frame-based needle biopsies. Approximately 5 minutes of the procedural time is related to the mounting of the MRI-compatible stereotactic frame. Based on the procedural time, we estimate that four cases are required in the learning curve to achieve this efficiency. Efficient algorithms for distortion corrections and isocenter localization are keys to ClearPoint stereotaxis. Routine quality assurance/control after each MRI software update and institutional information technology maintenance also contribute to efficiency. Real-time MRI is essential for definitive diagnosis in select cases. Conclusions ClearPoint stereotactic needle biopsy can be achieved in time frames comparable to frame-based stereotaxis. However, procedural efficiency requires 4 “learning curve” cases as well as vigilance in terms of MR distortion correction and information technology maintenance.

Radiomics is an emerging discipline that aims to make intelligent predictions and derive medical insights based on quantitative features extracted from medical images as a means to improve clinical diagnosis or outcome. Pertaining to glioblastoma, radiomics has provided powerful, noninvasive tools for gaining insights into pathogenesis and therapeutic responses. Radiomic studies have yielded meaningful biological understandings of imaging features that are often taken for granted in clinical medicine, including contrast enhancement on glioblastoma magnetic resonance imaging, the distance of a tumor from the subventricular zone, and the extent of mass effect. They have also laid the groundwork for noninvasive detection of mutations and epigenetic events that influence clinical outcomes such as isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) and O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT). In this article, we review advances in the field of glioblastoma radiomics as they pertain to prediction of IDH mutation status and MGMT promoter methylation status, as well as the development of novel, higher order radiomic parameters.

No abstract

No abstract