Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34466804›Full record

ReviewNeuro-oncology advances

Mouse models of glioblastoma for the evaluation of novel therapeutic strategies.

Alexander F Haddad, Jacob S Young, Dominic Amara, Mitchel S Berger, David R Raleigh, Manish K Aghi, Nicholas A Butowski

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuro-oncology advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 151 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
151citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

151 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Oncoimmunology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Advances in Aptamer Drug Delivery Systems for Treatment of Glioblastoma.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

91 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors.

Alexander F HaddadDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Jacob S YoungDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Dominic AmaraDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Mitchel S BergerDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1983-4892
David R RaleighDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Manish K AghiDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Nicholas A ButowskiDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.

Funding

Tumor cell and microenvironment changes causing antiangiogenic therapy resistanceR01NS079697 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI AGHI, MANISH · 2013 to 2021
$3.2M
Modeling and druggable-genome screening of glioblastoma invasion using regional biopsy-guided biomaterials systemsR01CA227136 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI AGHI, MANISH · 2018 to 2022
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA227136NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS079697
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glioblastoma (GBM) is an incurable brain tumor with a median survival of approximately 15 months despite an aggressive standard of care that includes surgery, chemotherapy, and ionizing radiation. Mouse models have advanced our understanding of GBM biology and the development of novel therapeutic strategies for GBM patients. However, model selection is crucial when testing developmental therapeutics, and each mouse model of GBM has unique advantages and disadvantages that can influence the validity and translatability of experimental results. To shed light on this process, we discuss the strengths and limitations of 3 types of mouse GBM models in this review: syngeneic models, genetically engineered mouse models, and xenograft models, including traditional xenograft cell lines and patient-derived xenograft models.

Indexed as

GL261glioblastomamurine modelstumorU87

Identifiers

PMID34466804
PMCPMC8403483

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.