ReviewJournal of neuro-oncology2025
Clinical trial design for novel targeted agents in neuro-oncology.
Review in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) 2009-2025: Broad scope and implementation-A progress report.Neuro-oncology · 2025Review
- Targeting the glioblastoma resection margin with locoregional nanotechnologies.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomarker-based clinical trials investigating targeted treatments for brain tumors have surged due to better access to biomarker testing and a deeper grasp of the molecular basis of tumor development. The design of clinical trials is crucial for evaluating safety, confirming effectiveness, and affirming the clinical advantage of novel agents, with the goal of approval by regulatory authorities to expand patient treatment options. Given some challenges unique to brain tumors, early-stage clinical trials for novel targeted agents must integrate pharmacokinetics and tissue-based pharmacodynamic assessments to establish timely go-no-go decisions for larger studies. Surgical window-of-opportunity trials can allow for the comparison of treated and untreated tumor samples, verifying target engagement and its modulatory effects for evidence of biological activity. Due to the challenges of achieving the required sample sizes to power efficacy analyses, later-stage trials of targeted therapies can include basket trials which test one drug on multiple tumor types, while umbrella trials evaluate several biomarkers within a single histology. Platform trials can also be leveraged to investigate multiple biomarker-driven hypotheses within a unified protocol and can incorporate Bayesian algorithms for adaptive randomization. Selecting appropriate endpoints, such as progression-free survival or overall response rate, is crucial and novel response assessment criteria need to be considered in the context of the tumor and therapy being investigated. Lastly, inclusivity in trials is essential to address health disparities and engage diverse patient populations to ensure real-world impact. Future trials should build upon the knowledge gained from both initial achievements and past setbacks in the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39377992What 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.