ArticleCancer medicine2024
Tumor treating fields for newly diagnosed high-grade glioma based on the criteria of 2021 WHO CNS5: A retrospective analysis of Chinese patients in a single center.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of tumor treating fields on overall and progression-free survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of tumor treating fields (TTF) combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy only in the treatment of glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Pilot report of an anti-PD-1/VEGF bispecific antibody for treating recurrent H3K27M-mutant diffuse midline gliomas.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2026Article
- Roles and Impacts of Integrative Medical Interventions in Central Nervous System Tumor Treatment: Multi-Technology Convergence and the Paradigm Shift Toward Functional Reconstruction.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Review
- State-of-the-art photodynamic therapy for malignant gliomas: innovations in photosensitizers and combined therapeutic approaches.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2025Review
- Tumor treating fields for newly diagnosed high-grade glioma based on the criteria of 2021 WHO CNS5: A retrospective analysis of Chinese patients in a single center.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- An ambispective, observational real-world study of tumor-treating fields for treatment of Chinese patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent/progressive glioblastoma.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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveHigh-grade glioma (HGG) is known to be characterized by a high degree of malignancy and a worse prognosis. The classical treatment is safe resection supplemented by radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Tumor treating fields (TTFields), an emerging physiotherapeutic modality that targets malignant solid tumors using medium-frequency, low-intensity, alternating electric fields to interfere with cell division, have been used for the treatment of new diagnosis of glioblastoma, however, their administration in HGG requires further clinical evidence. The efficacy and safety of TTFields in Chinese patients with HGG were retrospectively evaluated by us in a single center.
methodsWe enrolled and analyzed 52 patients with newly diagnosed HGG undergoing surgery and standard chemoradiotherapy regimens from December 2019 to June 2022, and followed them until June 2023. Based on whether they used TTFields, they were divided into a TTFields group and a non-TTFields group. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups.
resultsThere were 26 cases in the TTFields group and 26 cases in the non-TTFields group. In the TTFields group, the median PFS was 14.2 months (95% CI: 9.50-18.90), the median OS was 19.7 months (95% CI: 14.95-24.25) , the median interval from surgery to the start of treatment with TTFields was 2.47 months (95% CI: 1.47-4.13), and the median duration of treatment with TTFields was 10.6 months (95% CI: 9.57-11.63). 15 (57.69%) patients experienced an adverse event and no serious adverse event was reported. In the non-TTFields group, the median PFS was 9.57 months (95% CI: 6.23-12.91) and the median OS was 16.07 months (95% CI: 12.90-19.24). There was a statistically significant difference in PFS (p = 0.005) and OS (p = 0.007) between the two groups.
conclusionsIn this retrospective analysis, TTFields were observed to improve newly diagnosed HGG patients' median PFS and OS. Compliance was much higher than reported in clinical trials and safety remained good.
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.