Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25906439›Full record

ReviewCNS oncology2015

Use of bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma.

Ashley Ghiaseddin, Katherine B Peters

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in CNS oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ashley GhiaseddinThe Preston Robert Tisch Brain Tumor Center, Duke University Medical Center, PO Box 3624, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Katherine B Peters

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common adult primary brain neoplasm. Despite advances in treatment, GBM continues to be associated with considerable morbidity and mortality as compared with other malignancies. Standard treatment for GBM results in survival of 12.9 months (95% CI: 12.3-13.7 months) with a median progression-free survival of 7.2 months (95% CI: 6.4-8.2 months) in a modern GBM cohort. These aggressive tumors recur and treatment for recurrent GBM continues to have very poor outcomes. Prior to the use of bevacizumab, monoclonal antibody to VEGF, 6-month progression-free survival in clinical trials for recurrent GBM ranged from 9 to 15%. Trials utilizing bevacizumab and its subsequent US FDA approval have given more hope to recurrent GBM and this concise review discusses bevacizumab in recurrent GBM. This review focuses on time-to-event outcomes (overall survival, progression-free survival and 6-month progression-free survival) in clinical trials utilizing bevacizumab for the treatment of recurrent GBM. For this review, we have chosen to focus primarily on Phase II clinical trials that have been published and available in the literature (PubMed). While we focused primarily on time-to-event variables, toxicity and safety of bevacizumab is very important and this agent can be associated with serious life-threatening toxicities. We have included a general section of toxicities but for a more lengthy review please see the excellent study by Odia and colleagues.

Indexed as

Angiogenesis InhibitorsBevacizumabBrain NeoplasmsClinical Trials as TopicFemaleGlioblastomaHumansMaleAngiogenesis InhibitorsBevacizumabbevacizumabglioblastomaPhase IIrecurrent

Identifiers

PMID25906439
PMCPMC6088330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.