ArticleCancers2024
Regorafenib Treatment for Recurrent Glioblastoma Beyond Bevacizumab-Based Therapy: A Large, Multicenter, Real-Life Study.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Receptor tyrosine kinase targeted therapies in glioblastoma: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Temsirolimus safety evaluation: real-world adverse event analysis from the FDA adverse event reporting system database.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Current evidence and challenges of multitarget anti-angiogenic agents for glioblastoma: Results from clinical trials.iScience · 2025Review
- Clinical potential of antibody-drug conjugates in early-phase clinical trials for late-line treatment of advanced solid tumors.Investigational new drugs · 2025Article
- Unraveling the mechanisms of tricetin in renal cell carcinoma treatment through network pharmacology and experimental validation.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025Article
- Phase 2 study of regorafenib in patients with progressive glioblastoma after failure of bevacizumab.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
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesIn the REGOMA trial, regorafenib demonstrated an overall survival advantage over lomustine, and it has become a recommended treatment for recurrent glioblastoma in guidelines. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of regorafenib as a third-line treatment for patients with recurrent glioblastoma who progressed while taking bevacizumab-based therapy.
methodsThis retrospective, multicenter study in Turkey included 65 patients treated between 2021 and 2023 across 19 oncology centers. The main inclusion criteria were histologically confirmed isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-wildtype glioblastoma, progression after second-line bevacizumab-based treatment, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of ≤2. Patients received regorafenib 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle.
resultsThe median age of the patients was 53 years (18-67 years), with a median progression-free survival of 2.5 months (95% Confidence Interval: 2.23-2.75) and a median overall survival of 4.1 months (95% CI: 3.52-4.68). The median overall survival was improved in patients who received subsequent therapy after regorafenib treatment compared with those who did not (
conclusionsRegorafenib shows good efficacy and safety as a third-line treatment for recurrent glioblastoma after bevacizumab-based therapy. This study supports the use of regorafenib and emphasizes the need for further randomized studies to validate its role and optimize treatment strategies.
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.