Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35955765›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2022

Functional Precision Oncology: The Next Frontier to Improve Glioblastoma Outcome?

Dena Panovska, Frederik De Smet

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

2 authors.

Dena PanovskaDepartment of Imaging and Pathology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Frederik De SmetDepartment of Imaging and Pathology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glioblastoma remains the most malignant and intrinsically resistant brain tumour in adults. Despite intensive research over the past few decades, through which numerous potentially druggable targets have been identified, virtually all clinical trials of the past 20 years have failed to improve the outcome for the vast majority of GBM patients. The observation that small subgroups of patients displayed a therapeutic response across several unsuccessful clinical trials suggests that the GBM patient population probably consists of multiple subgroups that probably all require a distinct therapeutic approach. Due to extensive inter- and intratumoral heterogeneity, assigning the right therapy to each patient remains a major challenge. Classically, bulk genetic profiling would be used to identify suitable therapies, although the success of this approach remains limited due to tumor heterogeneity and the absence of direct relationships between mutations and therapy responses in GBM. An attractive novel strategy aims at implementing methods for functional precision oncology, which refers to the evaluation of treatment efficacies and vulnerabilities of (ex vivo) living tumor cells in a highly personalized way. Such approaches are currently being implemented for other cancer types by providing rapid, translatable information to guide patient-tailored therapeutic selections. In this review, we discuss the current state of the art of transforming technologies, tools and challenges for functional precision oncology and how these could improve therapy selection for GBM patients.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaAdultHumansMedical OncologyMutationPrecision Medicinedrug sensitivityfunctional precision oncologyglioblastoma

Identifiers

PMID35955765
PMCPMC9369403

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.