Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40916832›Full record

ArticleNeuro-oncology2026

Window of opportunity evaluation of blood-brain barrier permeability heterogeneity within and across high-grade glioma patients.

Ju-Hee Oh, Sarah K Reed, Cecile Riviere-Cazaux, Minjee Kim, Ann C Mladek, Silvia M Illamola, Wenjuan Zhang, Rachael A Vaubel, Alissa Caron, Michael S Regan and 16 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuro-oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

26 authors.

Ju-Hee OhBrain Barriers Research Center, Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Sarah K ReedDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Cecile Riviere-CazauxDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8857-4345
Minjee KimBrain Barriers Research Center, Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Ann C MladekDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Silvia M IllamolaDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Wenjuan ZhangBrain Barriers Research Center, Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Rachael A VaubelDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Alissa CaronDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Michael S ReganDepartment of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Angela K BirnbaumDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Afroz MohammadBrain Barriers Research Center, Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Wenqiu ZhangBrain Barriers Research Center, Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Jesse G DixonDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Timothy J KaufmannDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7483-1569
Leland S HuDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Daniel J MaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Sani KizilbashDepartment of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Nathalie Y R AgarDepartment of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Caterina GianniniDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2757-6782
Susan M GeyerDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Ian F ParneyDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Evanthia GalanisDepartment of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8014-786X
Terry C BurnsDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
William F ElmquistBrain Barriers Research Center, Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Jann N SarkariaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7489-4885

Funding

Therapy Evaluation CoreU19CA264362 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI PARNEY, IAN F · 2021 to 2025
$7.6M
Intracranial D-2-Hydroxyglutarate as a Monitoring Biomarker for IDH-mutant Glioma.R61NS122096 · NINDS · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI BURNS, TERRY · 2022 to 2024
$1.2M
Efficacy in Brain Tumors U54 CA 210180Mayo ClinicMayo Physical Sciences Center for Drug DistributionMITNational Brain Tumor Society AWD0006946/21-004061National Brain Tumor Society NCI R37CA276851National Brain Tumor Society T32GM145408NCI NIH HHS U19 CA264362NINDS NIH HHS R61 NS122096William H. Donner Professorship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDisruption of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) in high-grade brain tumors is characterized by contrast accumulation on diagnostic imaging. This window of opportunity study correlates contrast imaging features with the tumor distribution of BBB-permeable (levetiracetam) and -impermeable (cefazolin) drugs.

methodsPatients with a clinical diagnosis of a high-grade brain tumor underwent MRI for surgical planning. Cefazolin and levetiracetam were administered prior to skin incision, and serial plasma and image-registered tumor samples were collected during the operation. Drug levels were measured by LC-MS/MS, tissue drug levels were corrected for residual blood, and tumor-to-plasma concentration ratios were calculated. Intraoperative microdialysis was performed in a subset of patients to measure the same two drugs.

resultsTumor (n = 125) and plasma (n = 261) samples were available for analysis from 42 operative cases. Across all samples, the tumor-to-plasma ratio was significantly lower for cefazolin (marginal mean [MM]: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.11-0.19) as compared to levetiracetam (MM: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.64-0.75; P < .001). When compared between contrast-enhancing and non-enhancing regions, tumor-to-plasma ratios for cefazolin varied by 4.4-fold (0.27, 95% CI: 0.20-0.35 vs. 0.06, 95% CI: 0.04-0.08, respectively; P < .001), and varied for levetiracetam by 1.4-fold (0.88, 95% CI: 0.78-0.97 vs. 0.61, 95% CI: 0.55-0.66, respectively; P < .001). These results were confirmed with the intra-operative microdialysis and a population pharmacokinetic analysis.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates significant inter- and intra-tumoral heterogeneity in drug delivery for both levetiracetam and cefazolin within high-grade brain tumors that is not necessarily predicted by clinical MR imaging and may reflect tumor-induced changes in both perfusion and BBB integrity.

Indexed as

Blood-Brain BarrierBrain NeoplasmsCefazolinGliomaPiracetamAdultAgedFemaleHumansLevetiracetamMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMicrodialysisMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingPrognosisCefazolinLevetiracetamPiracetamblood–brain barrierglioblastomahigh-grade gliomamagnetic resonance imagingwindow of opportunity

Identifiers

PMID40916832
PMCPMC12962645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.