ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Response assessment of GBM during immunotherapy by delayed contrast treatment response assessment maps.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of meningeal lymphatic vessels with delayed contrast enhanced vessel-wall MRI in cerebral infarction.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Contrast clearance analysis in post-operative brain metastases resection cavities: case series and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Contrast clearance analysis in neuro-oncology: A systematic review and meta-analysis on differentiating posttreatment changes from tumor progression.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Assessing the treatment response of glioblastoma multiforme during immunotherapy (IT) is an open issue. Treatment response assessment maps (TRAMs) might help distinguish true tumor progression (TTP) and pseudoprogression (PsP) in this setting. Methods: We recruited 16 naïve glioblastoma patients enrolled in a phase II trial consisting of the Stupp protocol (a standardized treatment for glioblastoma involving combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy with temozolomide, followed by adjuvant temozolomide) plus IT with dendritic cells. Patients were followed up till progression or death; seven underwent a second surgery for suspected progression. Clinical, immunological, and MRI data were collected from all patients and histology in case of second surgery. Patients were classified as responders (progression-free survival, PFS > 12 months), and non-responders (PFS ≤ 12), HIGH-NK (natural killer cells, i.e., immunological responders), and LOW-NK (immunological non-responders) based on immune cell counts in peripheral blood. TRAMs differentiate contrast-enhancing lesions with different washout dynamics into hypothesized tumoral (conventionally blue-colored) vs. treatment-related (red-colored). Results: Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, a threshold of -0.066 in V Discussion: In conclusion, in our pilot study TRAMs support the discrimination between tumoral and treatment-related enhancing features in immunological responders vs. non-responders, the distinction between PsP and TTP, and might provide surrogate markers of immunological 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.