ReviewJournal of neuro-oncology2025
Emerging therapies for glioblastoma.
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 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.
- Research Advances on Organelle-Targeted Drug Delivery Systems for the Treatment of Brain Tumors and Central Nervous System Inflammation.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Sarcopenic obesity and cachexia as nutritional risk phenotypes and histology-specific outcomes after intracranial tumor resection: a histology-stratified NSQIP analysis of 27,057 cases.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
- Integrating Endovascular Drug Delivery into the Therapeutic Landscape of Glioblastoma.Cancers · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Glioblastoma (GBM) remains associated with poor outcomes, with a median survival of 15-18 months despite maximal safe resection, radiotherapy, and temozolomide. Therapeutic development has increasingly centered on overcoming drug resistance, intratumoral diversity, and restricted delivery across the blood-brain barrier. Progress in targeted therapy includes evaluation of EGFR inhibitors, multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and FGFR-directed agents, while rare molecularly defined subsets such as BRAF V600E and NTRK fusions offer tumor-agnostic precision approaches. JAK/STAT inhibition, PARP blockade, and PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway modulation remain under investigation, although clinical benefit has been inconsistent. In parallel, precision oncology platforms incorporating multi-omic profiling, patient-derived organoids, and functional drug testing are refining therapy selection and supporting rational drug combinations. Adaptive clinical trial frameworks such as GBM AGILE and INSIGhT are accelerating the evaluation of novel agents within stratified cohorts,while emerging approaches including ChemoID-guided therapy, radiogenomic profiling, and digital modeling are beginning to influence translational endpoints. Immunotherapy continues to be an active area of research, though efficacy has thus far been limited. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have not yet demonstrated significant survival benefits as monotherapy, but combination strategies with vaccines, oncolytic viruses, and engineered cellular therapies are under evaluation. CAR T-cell therapies are advancing toward bispecific and armored constructs with locoregional delivery, while oncolytic viruses such as DNX-2401 and PVSRIPO demonstrate potential for durable responses in select patients. Looking ahead, progress is likely to arise from biomarker-informed, multimodal regimens that integrate targeted agents, next-generation immunotherapies, and precision-guided strategies, while embedding translational endpoints into trial design to address the complex biology and therapeutic resistance of GBM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41372729What 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.