SynthesisBritish journal of cancer2026
Efficacy and safety of low- and high-intensity focused ultrasound in glioblastoma: a systematic review of preclinical and clinical studies.
Synthesis in British journal of cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Induction of transferrin receptor 1-mediated ferroptosis by ultrasound-triggered microbubble destruction sensitizes glioblastoma to radiotherapy.Molecular biomedicine · 2026Article
- Integrating Endovascular Drug Delivery into the Therapeutic Landscape of Glioblastoma.Cancers · 2026Review
- Review
- Multifunctional Hybrid Nanomedicines for Neurodegenerative Diseases: A Paradigm Shift from Rational Design to Clinical Translation.International journal of nanomedicine · 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
backgroundGlioblastoma (GBM) is an aggressive brain tumour with a poor prognosis despite existing multimodal treatments, limited by the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and high recurrence rates. Focused ultrasound (FUS), encompassing low-intensity (LIFU) and high-intensity (HIFU) modalities, offers non-invasive approaches to enhance drug delivery and ablate tumour tissue, respectively. To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of LIFU-mediated BBB opening and HIFU-induced thermal ablation in GBM treatment, comparing preclinical and clinical outcomes.
methodsThis review searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (August 2024) for studies on FUS in GBM. Preclinical and clinical studies reporting efficacy (tumour response, survival) and safety outcomes were included. Data were extracted using a standardised form, with quality assessed via SYRCLE (preclinical) and ROBINS-I (clinical) tools. Narrative synthesis was performed due to study heterogeneity.
resultsFrom 1817 records, 40 studies (26 preclinical, 14 clinical with 139 patients) were included. LIFU enhanced delivery of chemotherapies, immunotherapies, and nanoparticles, reducing tumour growth and extending survival in preclinical models (e.g., 26-81.2 days vs. 18-30.4 days), with clinical trials showing progression-free survival of 2.5-4.11 months, overall survival of 10-14 months, and 100% one-year survival with temozolomide in a small cohort (n = 6). HIFU achieved ~70% tumour growth inhibition preclinically but only ~10% ablation clinically. Both modalities were safe, with no severe adverse events, only mild, transient effects like petechiae (LIFU) and warmth (HIFU).
conclusionsLIFU and HIFU are promising, complementary GBM treatments, with LIFU excelling in drug delivery and HIFU in ablation. Large-scale, multicentre randomised controlled trials with standardised parameters are needed to validate their efficacy and safety and optimise their integration into clinical practice. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42024627213.
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.