ReviewNeurosurgical review2007
Some speculation on the origin of glioblastoma.
Review in Neurosurgical review, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tenascin-C: a novel candidate marker for cancer stem cells in glioblastoma identified by tissue microarrays.Journal of proteome research · 2015Article
- 14-3-3 eta depletion sensitizes glioblastoma cells to irradiation due to enhanced mitotic cell death.Cancer gene therapy · 2014Article
- Serine/threonine kinase, Melk, regulates proliferation and glial differentiation of retinal progenitor cells.Cancer science · 2012Article
- Glioblastoma multiforme in children: experience at Hospital Infantil de Mexico Federico Gomez.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2009Article
- Radiosensitisation of U87MG brain tumours by anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies.British journal of cancer · 2009Article
- Selective distribution of protein kinase A regulatory subunit RII{alpha} in rodent gliomas.Neuro-oncology · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Glioblastoma, the most common primary brain tumor, is also the most deadly, with median survival of about one year, which is little improved over the last five decades. Its pathogenesis is a vexing problem. Despite extensive basic and clinical scientific research, little is known regarding the cause of this disease, the genetic factors which drive its course, or any strategies which may result in effective treatment. This persistent resistance to understanding suggests to the authors that some of the fundamental assumptions regarding the disease are likely to be flawed, and that a new paradigm must be sought to replace them. This manuscript is a review of some of what is known regarding this disease, and then presents a series of hypotheses which compromise an alternative view of glioblastoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17123059What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.