ReviewCancers2023
Childhood Brain Tumors: A Review of Strategies to Translate CNS Drug Delivery to Clinical Trials.
Review in Cancers, 2023. 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.
- The Emerging Role of Ferroptosis in Pediatric Cancer Biology and Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Nanotechnology in Pediatric Neurology: Applications and Innovations.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Ultrasound-Enhanced Drug Delivery in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology: A New Therapeutic Strategy.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Precision Pediatric Cancer Nanomedicine: Advancing Personalized Nano Therapies to Reduce Non-Communicable Diseases Through AI-Driven 3D-Printed Drugs.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Challenges and Innovations in Paediatric Brain Tumour Treatments.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Current Landscape of Preclinical Models for Pediatric Gliomas: Clinical Implications and Future Directions.Cancers · 2025Review
- Exploring neonatal brain tumors: a narrative review about epidemiology, classification, and management.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Brain and spinal tumors affect 1 in 1000 people by 25 years of age, and have diverse histological, biological, anatomical and dissemination characteristics. A mortality of 30-40% means the majority are cured, although two-thirds have life-long disability, linked to accumulated brain injury that is acquired prior to diagnosis, and after surgery or chemo-radiotherapy. Only four drugs have been licensed globally for brain tumors in 40 years and only one for children. Most new cancer drugs in clinical trials do not cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Techniques to enhance brain tumor drug delivery are explored in this review, and cover those that augment penetration of the BBB, and those that bypass the BBB. Developing appropriate delivery techniques could improve patient outcomes by ensuring efficacious drug exposure to tumors (including those that are drug-resistant), reducing systemic toxicities and targeting leptomeningeal metastases. Together, this drug delivery strategy seeks to enhance the efficacy of new drugs and enable re-evaluation of existing drugs that might have previously failed because of inadequate delivery. A literature review of repurposed drugs is reported, and a range of preclinical brain tumor models available for translational development are explored.
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.