ArticlePLoS computational biology2023
Predicting regrowth of low-grade gliomas after radiotherapy.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Systematic Comparative Analysis of Tumor Size Models Based on Erlotinib Clinical Data in Advanced NSCLC.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2025Article
- Post-operative glioblastoma cancer cell distribution in the peritumoural oedema.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Overcoming chemotherapy resistance in low-grade gliomas: A computational approach.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diffuse low grade gliomas are invasive and incurable brain tumors that inevitably transform into higher grade ones. A classical treatment to delay this transition is radiotherapy (RT). Following RT, the tumor gradually shrinks during a period of typically 6 months to 4 years before regrowing. To improve the patient's health-related quality of life and help clinicians build personalized follow-ups, one would benefit from predictions of the time during which the tumor is expected to decrease. The challenge is to provide a reliable estimate of this regrowth time shortly after RT (i.e. with few data), although patients react differently to the treatment. To this end, we analyze the tumor size dynamics from a batch of 20 high-quality longitudinal data, and propose a simple and robust analytical model, with just 4 parameters. From the study of their correlations, we build a statistical constraint that helps determine the regrowth time even for patients for which we have only a few measurements of the tumor size. We validate the procedure on the data and predict the regrowth time at the moment of the first MRI after RT, with precision of, typically, 6 months. Using virtual patients, we study whether some forecast is still possible just three months after RT. We obtain some reliable estimates of the regrowth time in 75% of the cases, in particular for all "fast-responders". The remaining 25% represent cases where the actual regrowth time is large and can be safely estimated with another measurement a year later. These results show the feasibility of making personalized predictions of the tumor regrowth time shortly after RT.
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.