Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30667110›Full record

SynthesisGlia2019

Importance of GFAP isoform-specific analyses in astrocytoma.

Emma J van Bodegraven, Jessy V van Asperen, Pierre A J Robe, Elly M Hol

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Glia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Prognostic value of neurofilament light chain protein and glial fibrillary acidic protein in multiple sclerosis subtypes and disease activity patterns: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Primary Intracranial High Grade Congenital Glial Lesions (PIHGCL): A systematic review of case reports from 1985 to 2025.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Understanding Glioblastoma Dynamics Using 3D Organoids and Engineered Extracellular Matrix.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Neoplasia in the dromedary camel: a review (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Emma J van BodegravenDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3796-2516
Jessy V van AsperenDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Pierre A J RobeDepartment of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Elly M HolDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5604-2603
Utrecht University · NLNetherlands Institute for Neuroscience · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gliomas are a heterogenous group of malignant primary brain tumors that arise from glia cells or their progenitors and rely on accurate diagnosis for prognosis and treatment strategies. Although recent developments in the molecular biology of glioma have improved diagnosis, classical histological methods and biomarkers are still being used. The glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) is a classical marker of astrocytoma, both in clinical and experimental settings. GFAP is used to determine glial differentiation, which is associated with a less malignant tumor. However, since GFAP is not only expressed by mature astrocytes but also by radial glia during development and neural stem cells in the adult brain, we hypothesized that GFAP expression in astrocytoma might not be a direct indication of glial differentiation and a less malignant phenotype. Therefore, we here review all existing literature from 1972 up to 2018 on GFAP expression in astrocytoma patient material to revisit GFAP as a marker of lower grade, more differentiated astrocytoma. We conclude that GFAP is heterogeneously expressed in astrocytoma, which most likely masks a consistent correlation of GFAP expression to astrocytoma malignancy grade. The GFAP positive cell population contains cells with differences in morphology, function, and differentiation state showing that GFAP is not merely a marker of less malignant and more differentiated astrocytoma. We suggest that discriminating between the GFAP isoforms GFAPδ and GFAPα will improve the accuracy of assessing the differentiation state of astrocytoma in clinical and experimental settings and will benefit glioma classification.

Indexed as

AnimalsAstrocytomaBiomarkers, TumorCentral Nervous System NeoplasmsGlial Fibrillary Acidic ProteinHumansProtein IsoformsBiomarkers, TumorGFAP protein, humanGlial Fibrillary Acidic ProteinProtein IsoformsastrocytomabiomarkerGFAPGFAP variantsGFAPδgliomaintermediate filaments

Identifiers

PMID30667110
PMCPMC6617972
OpenAlexW2913080875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.