ReviewAPL bioengineering2025
The glioblastoma biomechanical landscape: A systematic review of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) of brain tumors and healthy brain.
Review in APL bioengineering, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stiffness and Tissue Viscosity in a Cerebral Neoplasm Measured by Preoperative Multifrequency Magnetic Resonance Elastography (MRE) Guide the Differential Diagnosis of Brain Tumors by Ruling Out Glioma.Case reports in medicine · 2026Article
- Mechanomedicine: Translating mechanical forces into therapeutic strategies.APL bioengineering · 2025Article
- The glioblastoma biomechanical landscape: A systematic review of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) of brain tumors and healthy brain.APL bioengineering · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnosis of a glioblastoma (GBM) brain tumor is associated with very poor prognosis. Currently, few preclinical models used to identify new therapies address the soft brain tissue environment and GBM mechanoresponses, which are implicated in disease progression. Understanding the GBM biomechanical landscape is critical to deriving improved preclinical models and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) holds promise to address this gap. Due to technical and feasibility issues for MRE of patient tumors at scale, most studies only report on small cohorts of patients, thus limiting the conclusions that may be drawn from individual studies. To thus gain a better overview, we have undertaken a systematic review and meta-analysis of the reported tissue viscoelastic property values from studies of both healthy brain and brain tumors, with a particular focus on delineating measurements relative to MRE transducer vibration frequency. Based on these analyses, healthy white matter consistently appears stiffer than gray matter. Further, analyses of pooled healthy brain tissue measurements vs human GBM suggested that, overall, the GBM has the same stiffness as the surrounding healthy tissue. This contrasted with mouse models of GBM, where the tumors appear softer than brain tissue. The limited number of studies of human GBM
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.