Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27708763›Full record

ArticleInterface focus2016

Multimodality imaging and mathematical modelling of drug delivery to glioblastomas.

Ahmed Boujelben, Michael Watson, Steven McDougall, Yi-Fen Yen, Elizabeth R Gerstner, Ciprian Catana, Thomas Deisboeck, Tracy T Batchelor, David Boas, Bruce Rosen and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interface focus, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Liquid biopsies for early diagnosis of brain tumours:Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Hybrid modeling frameworks of tumor development and treatment.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Systems biology and medicine · 2020
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. The many faces of mathematical modelling in oncology.The British journal of radiology · 2019
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Principles of Simultaneous PET/MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America · 2017
    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

12 authors.

Ahmed BoujelbenSchool of Petroleum Engineering , Heriot-Watt University , Edinburgh EH14 4AS , UK.
Michael WatsonSchool of Petroleum Engineering , Heriot-Watt University , Edinburgh EH14 4AS , UK.
Steven McDougallSchool of Petroleum Engineering , Heriot-Watt University , Edinburgh EH14 4AS , UK.
Yi-Fen YenMartinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital , Harvard Medical School , Charlestown, MA 02129 , USA.
Elizabeth R GerstnerDepartment of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital , Harvard Medical School , Boston, MA , USA.
Ciprian CatanaMartinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital , Harvard Medical School , Charlestown, MA 02129 , USA.
Thomas DeisboeckMartinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital , Harvard Medical School , Charlestown, MA 02129 , USA.
Tracy T BatchelorDepartment of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital , Harvard Medical School , Boston, MA , USA.
David BoasMartinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital , Harvard Medical School , Charlestown, MA 02129 , USA.
Bruce RosenMartinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital , Harvard Medical School , Charlestown, MA 02129 , USA.
Jayashree Kalpathy-CramerMartinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital , Harvard Medical School , Charlestown, MA 02129 , USA.
Mark A J ChaplainSchool of Mathematics and Statistics , University of St Andrews , St Andrews KY16 9SS , UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5727-2160

Funding

Quantitative MRI of Glioblastoma ResponseU01CA154601 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI KALPATHY-CRAMER, JAYASHREE · 2011 to 2016
$3.4M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA154601
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients diagnosed with glioblastoma, an aggressive brain tumour, have a poor prognosis, with a median overall survival of less than 15 months. Vasculature within these tumours is typically abnormal, with increased tortuosity, dilation and disorganization, and they typically exhibit a disrupted blood-brain barrier (BBB). Although it has been hypothesized that the 'normalization' of the vasculature resulting from anti-angiogenic therapies could improve drug delivery through improved blood flow, there is also evidence that suggests that the restoration of BBB integrity might limit the delivery of therapeutic agents and hence their effectiveness. In this paper, we apply mathematical models of blood flow, vascular permeability and diffusion within the tumour microenvironment to investigate the effect of these competing factors on drug delivery. Preliminary results from the modelling indicate that all three physiological parameters investigated-flow rate, vessel permeability and tissue diffusion coefficient-interact nonlinearly to produce the observed average drug concentration in the microenvironment.

Indexed as

computational modelling and simulationdrug deliveryglioblastomamultimodality imagingperfusion

Identifiers

PMID27708763
PMCPMC4992742

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.