ArticleNeurosurgical review2022
Regorafenib for recurrent high-grade glioma: a unicentric retrospective analysis of feasibility, efficacy, and toxicity.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Obstacles and Trials in Treating Primary Brain Tumors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Efficacy of Anlotinib in Treating Progressive Glioblastoma: Insights From a Single-Center Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Current evidence and challenges of multitarget anti-angiogenic agents for glioblastoma: Results from clinical trials.iScience · 2025Review
- Regorafenib and glioblastoma: a literature review of preclinical studies, molecular mechanisms and clinical effectiveness.Expert reviews in molecular medicine · 2024Review
- Glioblastoma Therapy: Past, Present and Future.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Advances in Drug Therapy for Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumour.Current medicinal chemistry · 2024Review
- Antiangiogenic Therapy for Malignant Brain Tumors: Does It Still Matter?Current oncology reports · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We describe here 11 consecutive patients with recurrence of high-grade glioma treated with regorafenib at our university medical center. The majority of patients had MGMT promoter methylation (9/11 cases). Regorafenib was given as 2nd line systemic treatment in 6/11 patients and 3rd or higher line treatment in 5/11 patients. The median number of applied cycles was 2 with dosage reductions in 5/11. Response to treatment was observed in 4/11 (PR in 1/11, and SD in 3/11). Median overall survival for the cohort was 16.1 months, median progression-free survival 9.0 months, and median time to treatment failure 3.3 months. Side effects of any CTCAE grade were noted in all patients, hereby 6/11 with CTCAE °III-IV reactions. High-grade side effects were of dermatologic, cardiovascular, and hematologic nature. A mean treatment delay of 57.5 days (range 23-119) was noted between tumor board recommendation and treatment initiation due to the application process for off-label use in this indication. In conclusion, treatment with regorafenib in relapsed high-grade glioma is a feasible treatment option but has to be considered carefully due to the significant side effect profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.