ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2015
Evaluation of the Safety and Benefit of Phase I Oncology Trials for Patients With Primary CNS Tumors.
Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the landscape of targetable alterations in patients with glioblastoma.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Design and conduct of theranostic trials in neuro-oncology: Challenges and opportunities.Neuro-oncology · 2024Review
- Glioblastoma Vaccines as Promising Immune-Therapeutics: Challenges and Current Status.Vaccines · 2024Review
- Molecular profile to guide personalized medicine in adult patients with primary brain tumors: results from the ProfiLER trial.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2021Article
- Integrated Analysis of the Prognosis-Associated RNA-Binding Protein Genes and Candidate Drugs in Renal Papillary Cell Carcinoma.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Glioblastoma in adults: a Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) and European Society of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) consensus review on current management and future directions.Neuro-oncology · 2020Review
- Optimizing eligibility criteria and clinical trial conduct to enhance clinical trial participation for primary brain tumor patients.Neuro-oncology · 2020Article
- Barriers to accrual and enrollment in brain tumor trials.Neuro-oncology · 2019Review
- Profiles of brain metastases: Prioritization of therapeutic targets.International journal of cancer · 2018Article
- Multiple Expressed Endogenous Glioma Epitopes as Novel Vaccines for Gliomas.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatients with high-grade gliomas (HGG) are frequently excluded from first-in-human solid tumor trials because of perceived poor prognosis, excessive toxicities, concomitant drug interactions, and poor efficacy. We conducted an analysis of outcomes from select, single-agent phase I studies in patients with HGG. We compared outcomes to pooled analysis of published studies in solid tumors with various molecular and cytotoxic drugs evaluated as single agents or as combinations. PATIENT AND
methodsIndividual records of patients with recurrent HGG enrolled onto Adult Brain Tumor Consortium trials of single-agent, cytotoxic or molecular agents from 2000 to 2008 were analyzed for baseline characteristics, toxicities, responses, and survival.
resultsOur analysis included 327 patients with advanced, refractory HGG who were enrolled onto eight trials involving targeted molecular (n=5) and cytotoxic (n=3) therapies. At enrollment, patients had a median Karnofsky performance score of 90 and median age of 52 years; 62% were men, 63% had glioblastoma, and the median number of prior systemic chemotherapies was one. Baseline laboratory values were in an acceptable range to meet eligibility criteria. Patients were on the study for a median of two cycles (range, <one to 56 cycles), and 96% were evaluable for primary end points. During cycle 1, grade≥3 nonhematologic and grade≥4 hematologic toxicities were 5% (28 of 565 adverse events) and 0.9% (five of 565 adverse events), respectively, and 66% of these occurred at the highest dose level. There was one death attributed to drug. Overall response rate (complete and partial response) was 5.5%. Median progression-free and overall survival times were 1.8 and 6 months, respectively.
conclusionPatients with HGG who meet standard eligibility criteria may be good candidates for solid tumor phase I studies with single-agent molecular or cytotoxic drugs with favorable preclinical rationale and pharmacokinetic properties in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.