ArticleDiscover oncology2024
A prognostic model for overall survival in recurrent glioma patients treated with bevacizumab-containing therapy.
Article in Discover oncology, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- PET-based Radiomics Analysis for Predicting Prognosis and Differentiation Treatment-Related Changes in Glioma: A Systematic Review.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2026Article
- A Rho GTPase-related gene signature predicts prognosis and reveals an immunosuppressive microenvironment in lung adenocarcinoma: an integrated analysis of bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing data.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Efficacy and influencing factors of bevacizumab monotherapy and combination therapy in recurrent high-grade glioma: a twelve-year experience.BMC neurology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Predictive markers and prognostic models are useful for the individualization of cancer treatment. In this study, we sought to identify clinical and molecular factors to predict overall survival in recurrent glioma patients receiving bevacizumab-containing regimens. A cohort of 102 patients was retrospectively collected from June 2011 to January 2022 at our institution. A nomogram was generated by Cox regression and feature selection algorithms based on 19 clinicopathological and 60 molecular variables. The model's performance was internally evaluated by bootstrapping in terms of discrimination and calibration. The median overall survival from the initiation of bevacizumab administration to death or last follow-up was 11.6 months (95% CI: 9.2-13.8 months) for all 102 patients, 10.2 months (95% CI: 6.4-13.3 months) for 66 patients with grade 4 tumors, and 13.8 months (lower limit of 95% CI: 11.5 months) for 36 patients with tumors of grade lower or not available. In the final model, a lower WHO 2021 grade (Grade lower or not available vs. Grade 4, HR: 0.398, 95% CI: 0.223-0.708, p = 0.00172), having received adjuvant radiochemotherapy (Yes vs. No, HR: 0.488, 95% CI: 0.268-0.888, p = 0.0189), and wildtype EGFR (Wildtype vs. Altered, HR: 0.193, 95% CI: 0.0506-0.733, p = 0.0157; Not available vs. Altered, HR: 0.386, 95% CI: 0.184-0.810, p = 0.0118) were significantly associated with longer overall survival in multivariate Cox regression. The overall concordance index was 0.652 (95% CI: 0.566-0.714), and the areas under the time-dependent curves for 6-, 12-, and 18-month overall survival were 0.677 (95% CI: 0.516-0.816), 0.654 (95% CI: 0.470-0.823), and 0.675 (95% CI: 0.491-0.860), respectively. A prognostic model for overall survival in recurrent glioma patients treated with bevacizumab-based therapy was established and internally validated. It could serve as a reference tool for clinicians to assess the extent the patients may benefit from bevacizumab and stratify their treatment response.
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.