Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28399638›Full record

Trial reportCNS oncology2017

Tumor-treating fields plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for glioblastoma at first recurrence: a post hoc analysis of the EF-14 trial.

Santosh Kesari, Zvi Ram, EF-14 Trial Investigators

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in CNS oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 49 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 8 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.

NCT00916409 phase3completednot on this map

A Prospective, Multi-center Trial of NovoTTF-100A Together With Temozolomide Compared to Temozolomide Alone in Patients With Newly Diagnosed GBM.

TypeinterventionalSponsorNovoCure Ltd.Ran2009 to 2017Enrolled700ConditionsGlioblastoma MultiformeArmsNovoTTF-100A device, Temozolomide
NCT03258021 unknown statusnot on this map

The Use of TTFields for Newly Diagnosed GBM Patients in Germany in Routine Clinical Care - TIGER Study

TypeobservationalSponsorNovoCure Ltd.Ran2017 to 2021Enrolled710ConditionsGlioblastomaArmsTTFields
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Neuromodulation in Neuro-Oncology: A Scoping Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026
    Review
  10. Post-recurrence management of malignant glial brain tumors: therapeutic strategies, evidence and limitations, palliative care, terminal sedation, and end-of-life considerations.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

3 authors.

Santosh KesariTranslational Neuro-Oncology Laboratories, UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Zvi RamNeurosurgery Department, The Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center & Tel Aviv University Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv, Israel.
EF-14 Trial Investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis post hoc analysis of the EF-14 trial (NCT00916409) of tumor-treating fields (TTFields) plus temozolomide versus temozolomide alone in newly diagnosed glioblastoma compared the efficacy of TTFields plus chemotherapy (physician's choice) versus chemotherapy alone after first recurrence.

methodsPatients on TTFields plus temozolomide continued TTFields plus second-line chemotherapy after first recurrence. Some patients on temozolomide alone crossed over after approval of TTFields for recurrent GBM. The primary efficacy outcome was overall survival (OS).

resultsAfter disease progression, 131 patients received TTFields plus chemotherapy and 73 chemotherapy alone. Thirteen patients in the original temozolomide-alone group crossed over to receive TTFields plus chemotherapy after disease progression, resulting in 144 patients receiving TTFields plus chemotherapy and 60 chemotherapy alone. Median follow-up was 12.6 months. Bevacizumab, alone or with cytotoxic chemotherapy, was the most frequent treatment. Median OS in the TTFields plus chemotherapy group was significantly longer versus chemotherapy alone (11.8 vs 9.2 months; HR: 0.70; 95% CI, 0.48-1.00; p=0.049). TTFields showed a low toxicity safety profile, as previously reported, with no grade 3/4 device-related adverse events.

conclusionTTFields plus chemotherapy after first disease recurrence on TTFields plus temozolomide or temozolomide alone prolonged OS in patients in the EF-14 trial.

Indexed as

Electric Stimulation TherapyAdultAftercareAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Agents, AlkylatingAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBevacizumabBrain NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyDacarbazineFemaleGlioblastomaHumansMaleMiddle AgedAntineoplastic Agents, AlkylatingAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBevacizumabDacarbazineTemozolomidebevacizumabdisease recurrenceglioblastomaoverall survivalsecond-line chemotherapyTTFields

Identifiers

PMID28399638
PMCPMC6009218

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.