ArticleCancers2023
Unlocking Bevacizumab's Potential: rCBV
Article in Cancers, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Heterogeneity phenotypes in recurrent glioblastoma: a multimodal MRI-based spatial mapping framework for precision treatment.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Molecular Correlates of Long-Term Response to Bevacizumab in Glioblastoma.JCO precision oncology · 2025Article
- Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAberrant vascular architecture and angiogenesis are hallmarks of glioblastoma IDH-wildtype, suggesting that these tumors are suitable for antiangiogenic therapy. Bevacizumab was FDA-approved in 2009 following promising results in two clinical trials. However, its use for recurrent glioblastomas remains a subject of debate, as it does not universally improve patient survival. PURPOSES: In this study, we aimed to analyze the influence of tumor vascularity on the benefit provided by BVZ and propose preoperative rCBVmax at the high angiogenic tumor habitat as a predictive biomarker to select patients who can benefit the most.
methodsClinical and MRI data from 106 patients with glioblastoma IDH-wildtype have been analyzed. Thirty-nine of them received BVZ, and the remaining sixty-seven did not receive a second-line treatment. The ONCOhabitats method was used to automatically calculate rCBV.
resultsWe found a median survival from progression of 305 days longer for patients with moderate vascular tumors who received BVZ than those who did not receive any second-line treatment. This contrasts with patients with high-vascular tumors who only presented a median survival of 173 days longer when receiving BVZ. Furthermore, better responses to BVZ were found for the moderate-vascular group with a higher proportion of patients alive at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after progression.
conclusionsWe propose rCBVmax as a potential biomarker to select patients who can benefit more from BVZ after tumor progression. In addition, we propose a threshold of 7.5 to stratify patients into moderate- and high-vascular groups to select the optimal second-line treatment.
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.