Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34234357›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

The drug development pipeline for glioblastoma-A cross sectional assessment of the FDA Orphan Drug Product designation database.

Pascal Johann, Dominic Lenz, Markus Ries

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Risk Factors for Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation and Weaning Failure: A Systematic Review.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Materials today. Bio · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pascal JohannGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Division of Paediatric Neurooncology, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8857-6148
Dominic LenzPaediatric Neurology and Metabolic Medicine, Center for Paediatric and Adolescent Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Markus RiesPaediatric Neurology and Metabolic Medicine, Center for Paediatric and Adolescent Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DEGerman Cancer Research Center · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlioblastoma (GBM) is the most common malignant brain tumour among adult patients and represents an almost universally fatal disease. Novel therapies for GBM are being developed under the orphan drug legislation and the knowledge on the molecular makeup of this disease has been increasing rapidly. However, the clinical outcomes in GBM patients with currently available therapies are still dismal. An insight into the current drug development pipeline for GBM is therefore of particular interest.

objectivesTo provide a quantitative clinical-regulatory insight into the status of FDA orphan drug designations for compounds intended to treat GBM.

methodsQuantitative cross-sectional analysis of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Orphan Drug Product database between 1983 and 2020. STROBE criteria were respected.

resultsFour orphan drugs out of 161 (2,4%) orphan drug designations were approved for the treatment for GBM by the FDA between 1983 and 2020. Fourteen orphan drug designations were subsequently withdrawn for unknown reasons. The number of orphan drug designations per year shows a growing trend. In the last decade, the therapeutic mechanism of action of designated compounds intended to treat glioblastoma shifted from cytotoxic drugs (median year of designation 2008) to immunotherapeutic approaches and small molecules (median year of designation 2014 and 2015 respectively) suggesting an increased focus on precision in the therapeutic mechanism of action for compounds the development pipeline.

conclusionDespite the fact that current pharmacological treatment options in GBM are sparse, the drug development pipeline is steadily growing. In particular, the surge of designated immunotherapies detected in the last years raises the hope that elaborate combination possibilities between classical therapeutic backbones (radiotherapy and chemotherapy) and novel, currently experimental therapeutics may help to provide better therapies for this deadly disease in the future.

Indexed as

GlioblastomaOrphan Drug ProductionUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAntineoplastic AgentsBrain NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesDatabases, FactualDrug ApprovalDrug DevelopmentHumansUnited StatesAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID34234357
PMCPMC8263276
OpenAlexW3178364451

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.